UC-NRLF 


LIBRARY 

OF  THE 

University  of  California. 


GIFT  OF 

Class 


.  ^jt^vvsaJ>v 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2007  with  funding  from 

Microsoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/cityschoolexpendOOstrarich 


City  School  Expenditures 

The  Variability  and  Interrelation 
of  the  Various  Items 


By 

George  Drayton  Strayer,  A.B. 


Submitted  in  partial  fulfilment  of  the  requirements 

for  the  degree  of  Doctor  of  Philosophy 

in  the  Faculty  of  Philosophy 

Columbia  University 


905 


CONTENTS 


PAGE 

Introduction            j 

The  Problem ~ 

Data I0 

Variability ,  .42 

Relationships  .                  30 

Conclusion '  I00 

Acknowledgment I05 

VlTA 104 


157909 


City  School   Expenditures 


THE  VARIABILITY  AND   INTERRELATION   OF 
THE  PRINCIPAL  ITEMS 

By  GEORGE  DRAYTON  STRAYER,  A.B.,  Johns  Hopkins  University; 
Fellow  in  Education,  Teachers  College,  1904-05 

INTRODUCTION 

The  importance  of  the  subject-matter  of  Mr.  Strayer's  in- 
vestigation needs  no  comment.  The  methods,  being  in  some 
respects  new  in  the  literature  of  education,  deserve  some  com- 
ment. 

It  is  impossible  to  gain  adequate  insight  into  facts  as  com- 
plex as  those  of  school  expenses  and  school  achievements  with- 
out some  use  of  technical  statistical  methods.  If  Mr.  Strayer's 
report  puzzles  some  readers  by  its  tables  of  frequency,  its  con- 
stant use  of  the  median  rather  than  the  average  as  a  measure  of 
central  tendency,  its  coefficients  of  correlation  and  their  correc- 
tions, it  is  of  necessity.  The  facts  could  not  otherwise  be 
handled  properly — in  some  cases  not  at  all. 

The  one  matter  of  technique  which  needs  explanation  and 
perhaps  apology  is  the  use  of  the  Pearson  Coefficient  of  Correla- 
tion. This  measure  of  the  general  relation  of  a  deviation  of 
the  amount  of  one  item  in  the  budget  from  the  typical  amount 
of  that  item  to  the  deviation  in  the  same  city  of  some  other 
item  from  its  typical  amount,  is  indispensable  but  necessarily 
obscure.  It  is  indispensable:  (1)  because  it  presents  to  the 
mind  in  a  single  figure  a  mass  of  individual  relationships  which 


2  City  School  Expenditures 

in  their  detailed  form  leave  no  definite  impress  on  even  the 
most  skilled  examiner  of  statistics  (e.  g.,  let  any  one  try  to 
measure  accurately  the  facts  of  the  relation  of  teachers'  salaries 
to  janitors'  salaries  without  its  aid);  (2)  because  it  makes  all 
relationships  between  any  one  and  any  other  of  the  same  order 
of  facts  comparable  and  commensurate  (e.  g.,  let  any  one 
without  its  use  say  whether  the  total  cost  per  pupil  is  more  or 
less  closely  followed  by  the  cost  per  pupil  of  text-books  and 
supplies  than  by  that  for  janitors'  salaries).  It  is  necessarily 
obscure:  (1)  because  the  general  tendency  for  which  it  stands 
represents  a  result  which  an  indefinite  number  of  different 
arrangements  of  relationships  could  all  equally  give,  and  (2) 
because  the  variability  of  the  individual  relationships,  from 
which  it  rescues  us  in  part,  still  remains  to  prevent  any  prophecy 
of  the  coefficient's  implication  concerning  any  special  case  other 
than  a  most  complicated  statement  of  probabilities.  Readers 
who  are  familiar  with  modern  statistics  will  have  gained  a  con- 
crete acquaintance  with  coefficients  which  will  make  tables 
XXXVII,  XXXIX,  etc.,  clear  and  emphatic.  To  others  they 
cannot  be.  On  the  whole,  although  the  arithmetical  labor  of 
calculating  these  coefficients  is  enormous,  they  should  be  used 
in  all  studies  of  relationships  of  mental  and  social  traits.  Those 
calculated  by  Mr.  Strayer  will  increase  in  importance  as  we 
obtain  from  the  budgets  of  private  schools,  colleges,  business  cor- 
porations, and  the  like,  similar  coefficients  to  compare  with  them. 
One  other  feature  of  Mr.  Strayer's  method  of  presentation 
needs  comment — his  careful  arrangement  of  the  individual 
measures  from  which  all  his  later  results  are  derived.  The  pub- 
lication of  these  in  full  enables  any  critic  to  verify  the  conclu- 
sions, any  investigator  of  the  same  problem  to  combine  new 
data  with  them  so  as  to  get  better  advantages  from  both,  and 
any  investigator  of  other  problems  to  use  in  his  own  way  a  body 
of  facts  which  could  be  obtained  now  only  at  a  cost  of  hundreds 
of  hours,  and  in  a  few  years  could  not  be  obtained  at  all.  The 
reader  who  is  irritated,  as  well  as  awed,  by  the  pages  of  indi- 
vidual records  must  remember  that  in  the  social  sciences  lump- 
ing facts  into  averages  and  totals  conceals  far  more  truth  than 
it  reveals,  and  destroys  half  the  value  of  the  record  to  the  expert. 

Edward  L.  Thorndike 

April,  1905 


City  School  Expenditures 


THE  PROBLEM 

The  financial  problem  in  connection  with  our  public  schools 
is  fundamental.  We  may  devise  improved  courses  of  study, 
we  may  provide  for  the  proper  training  of  teachers,  our  aim 
may  be  sound  and  our  method  well  grounded,  and  still  we  must 
have  the  money  to  build  and  properly  equip  and  maintain 
buildings,  to  provide  the  necessary  books  and  supplies,  to  hire 
the  competent  supervisors  and  teachers,  or  all  will  count  for 
naught.  We  believe  that  our  schools  have  advanced  in  this 
country  during  the  past  fifty  years,  and  we  know  that  along 
with  this  advance  the  amount  of  money  spent  for  public  educa- 
tion has  increased  in  a  ratio  altogether  out  of  proportion  to  the 
number  of  people  educated.  Still  further,  we  believe  that  those 
sections  of  our  country  which  to-day  spend  the  most  money  for 
public  education  are  the  sections  which  are  doing  the  best  work. 
Especially  with  the  growth  of  cities  and  the  great  increase  of 
urban  population  has  the  amount  of  money  spent  for  public 
schools  grown  larger.  But  even  the  great  increase  in  expendi- 
ture, amounting  in  some  cases  to  ten-  or  even  twenty-fold  during 
the  past  fifty  years,  has  not  been  sufficient  to  satisfy  the  de- 
mands of  those  who  believe  in  the  efficacy  and  necessity  of 
public  education  in  our  modern  democracy. 

President  Eliot,  in  his  address  before  the  Connecticut  State 
Teachers'  Association  in  1902,  argued  for  more  liberal  expendi- 
tures for  public  education,  in  order  that  we  might  accomplish 
by  this  means  certain  desirable  ends  which  we  have  as  yet 
failed  to  attain.  He  sums  up  his  argument  in  one  part  of  his 
address  as  follows:  "My  first  argument  in  support  of  this 
proposition  is  that,  as  a  nation  and  on  the  whole,  in  spite  of 
many  successes,  we  have  met  with  many  failures  of  various 
sorts  in  our  efforts  to  educate  the  whole  people,  and  still  see 
before  us  many  unsurmounted  difficulties.  It  is  indisputable 
that  we  have  experienced  a  profound  disappointment  in  the 
results  thus  far  obtained  from  a  widely  diffused  popular  educa- 
tion. It  was  a  stupendous  undertaking  at  the  start,  and  the 
difficulties  have  increased  with  every  generation.  Our  fore- 
fathers expected  miracles  of  prompt  enlightenment ;  and  we  are 
seriously  disappointed  that  popular  education  has  not  defended 


4  City  School  Expenditures 

us  against  barbarian  vices  like  drunkenness  and  gambling, 
against  increase  of  crime  and  insanity,  and  against  innumerable 
delusions,  impostures,  and  follies.  We  ought  to  spend  more 
public  money  on  schools,  because  the  present  expenditures  do 
not  produce  all  the  good  results  which  were  expected  and  may 
reasonably  be  aimed  at."  * 

In  a  second  address  to  the  New  Hampshire  State  Teachers' 
Association  in  the  same  year,  President  Eliot  maintained  that 
more  money  should  be  given  to  the  public  schools,  because  of 
the  great  gains  that  have  been  made  in  public  education. 
Some  of  the  improvements  to  which  he  called  attention 
were  the  establishment  of  kindergartens,  improvement  in 
the  curricula  of  elementary  schools,  increase  in  the  number 
of  high  schools,  improvement  in  school  buildings,  new  kinds 
of  schools  (manual  training,  the  mechanic  arts  high  school, 
the  evening  school,  and  the  vacation  school),  improvement 
in  normal  schools,  improved  methods  of  selecting  and  ap- 
pointing teachers,  pensions  for  teachers,  increased  employment 
of  educational  experts  in  supervising  and  executive  functions 
of  urban  school  systems,  the  increased  use  of  high  schools,  the 
introduction  of  the  costly  elective  system,  better  university 
teachers,  improved  professional  training,  increased  opportunity 
for  the  higher  education  of  women,  and  increased  attention 
given  to  the  welfare  of  the  body.  Every  one  of  these  educa- 
tional improvements,  says  President  Eliot,  "has  been  costly; 
but  every  one  has  justified  itself  in  the  eyes  of  the  tax-payers, 
or  of  those  who  voluntarily  pay  for  it;  not  one  would  now  be 
recalled,  and  the  total  result  encourages  the  expectation  that 
large  new  expenditures  would  commend  themselves  to  the 
people  at  the  start,  and  in  the  end  would  prove  to  be  both 
profitable  in  the  material  sense  and  civilizing  in  the  humane 
sense. 

"You  have  doubtless  noticed  that  the  gains  I  have  reported 
are  chiefly  in  education  above  fourteen  years  of  age.  There  has 
been  improvement  in  the  first  eight  grades  since  1870,  but  it 
is  relatively  small.  Yet  the  great  majority  of  American  chil- 
dren do  not  get  beyond  the  eighth  grade.  Philanthropists, 
social  philosophers,  and  friends  of  free  institutions,  is  that  the 
fit  educational  outcome  of  a  century  of  democracy  in  an  unde- 
1  Eliot,  More  Money  for  the  Public  Schools,  p.  23. 


City  School  Expenditures  5 

veloped  country  of  immense  natural  resources?  Leaders  and 
guides  of  the  people,  is  that  what  you  think  just  and  safe? 
People  of  the  United  States,  is  that  what  you  desire  and 
intend?"1 

There  is  nothing  unusual  nor  radical  in  this  appeal  of  Presi- 
dent Eliot.  In  almost  every  educational  journal  one  can  find 
arguments  for  increased  expenditures  for  teachers'  salaries.  In 
many  states  laws  have  been  passed  or  proposed  which  declare 
that  all  text-books  shall  be  furnished  free  to  children.  In  every 
community  new  school  buildings  are  built  better  than  the  old. 
More  attention  is  given  to  proper  heating,  lighting,  and  ven- 
tilating. All  this  means  an  increase  in  school  expenditures. 
Along  with  this  great  increase  in  expenditure  and  with  the  de- 
mand for  still  greater  sums  of  money  for  public  education, 
there  has  arisen  the  necessity  for  greater  ability  in  the  handling 
of  school  moneys,  and,  on  the  part  of  the  tax-payers  who  furnish 
the  money,  a  desire  to  know  how  the  money  is  spent  and  what 
results  are  obtained. 

Those  who  have  controlled  our  free  public  schools  have 
always  had  the  double  function  of  attending  to  the  business 
affairs  of  the  school  system,  as  well  as  looking  after  the  matter 
of  instruction.  In  the  early  days,  when  the  chief  expenditure 
was  for  the  teacher's  salary  and  there  were  very  few  other  items 
of  expense,  it  was  a  comparatively  simple  matter  to  administer 
the  finances  of  the  then  small  school  systems.  With  the  great 
growth  of  cities  and  school  systems,  together  with  the  enormous 
increase  in  amount  and  variety  of  expenditures,  the  problem  of 
business  administration  has  become  very  complex.  This  de- 
mand for  expert  ability  in  dealing  with  the  business  affairs  of 
the  schools  has  been  met  in  different  ways.  In  some  instances 
a  special  committee  of  the  school  board  or  committee  has  been 
given  charge  of  the  financial  affairs  of  the  schools.  In  many 
cases  the  superintendent  has  not  only  supervised  instruction, 
but  has  also  been  the  business  manager  for  the  school  system. 
In  other  cases,  notably  in  Cleveland  and  Indianapolis,  a  special 
executive  officer  has  been  provided  to  look  after  the  business 
affairs.  There  is  a  growing  feeling  that  the  business  affairs  of 
the  large  school  systems  demand  expert  ability,  and  that  it 
is  financially  profitable  for  a  large  city  to  employ  a  business 
»  Eliot,  More  Money  for  the  Public  Schools,  pp.  125-127. 


6  City  School  Expenditures 

director  to  look  after  the  financial  interests  of  the  school  system. 
The  Chicago  Commission,  appointed  in  1898,  recommended  that 
the  f miction  of  the  school  board  "be  chiefly  legislative,  the 
executive  work  being  delegated  to  the  superintendent  and  busi- 
ness manager."  *  However  desirable  it  may  be  to  have  a  special 
executive  officer  whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  look  after  the  business 
affairs  of  the  schools,  the  fact  remains  that  in  vastly  the  greater 
majority  of  cities  of  over  ten  thousand  inhabitants  this  work 
is  now  done  by  the  school  board,  by  the  superintendent  of 
schools,  or  by  the  board  and  the  superintendent  in  co-opera- 
tion with  each  other. 

In  the  year  1899  there  reported  to  the  Department  of  Super- 
intendence of  the  National  Educational  Association  the  Com- 
mittee on  Uniform  Financial  Reports,  which  had  been  appointed 
at  the  previous  meeting.  Something  of  the  purpose  for  which 
this  Committee  was  appointed,  as  well  as  their  recommendations, 
may  be  found  in  the  following  quotation : 

"While  local  conditions  enter  into  the  necessities  for  ex- 
pense in  any  public  school  system,  yet  one  of  the  most  useful 
means  of  estimating  proper  expenditures  should  be  afforded  by 
a  study  of  the  financial  school  reports  of  other  similar  cities  or 
districts.  As  these  reports  are  at  present  made,  they  are  of 
little  use  in  this  respect.  Items  given  in  one  report  are  omitted 
from  another.  Items  of  income  and  outgo  are  differently 
grouped  in  different  reports,  and  the  statement  is  made  in  such 
a  way  that  it  is  impossible  to  separate  the  items  for  the  purpose 
of  re-classification.  In  getting  the  cost  of  education  per  child, 
different  items  are  put  into  the  total  cost  of  education,  which 
forms  the  dividend,  while  the  divisor  is  sometimes  the  number 
enrolled,  sometimes  the  average  number  in  daily  membership, 
sometimes  the  average  number  in  daily  attendance. 

"One  of  the  chief  studies  of  a  wise  administrator  of  schools 
is  to  make  the  cost  of  education  per  child  as  low  as  is  consistent 
with  the  best  service.  Attention  to  this  and  to  the  compara- 
tive study  of  the  reports  for  a  period  of  years,  now  that  most 
of  our  school  systems  are  established  on  a  somewhat  similar 
plan,  should  give  an  idea  of  the  average  or  normal  cost  of  edu- 
cation per  child.  Having  this,  the  manager  of  schools  may 
know  how  expense  in  his  system  differs  from  this  normal  stan- 
1  Report  of  the  Chicago  Educational  Commission. 


UNIVERSITY 

or 

6Yty  School  Expenditures 

dard,  and,  if  not  normal,  why  it  is  above  or  below.  This  knowl 
edge  cannot  be  arrived  at,  however,  until  the  same  items  are 
included  when  comparing  cost  of  education,  and  the  same  divi- 
sor is  used  when  obtaining  the  average.  By  careful  compara- 
tive study,  railroad  men  know  the  average  cost  of  hauling 
freight  per  ton  per  mile,  and  the  cost  per  mile  of  transporting  a 
passenger.  Those  administering  schools  should  be  as  well  in- 
formed upon  the  cost  of  education."  ■  Concerning  the  form  of 
report  recommended  by  this  Committee,  we  shall  have  some- 
thing to  say  later. 

Just  at  this  point  it  is  interesting  to  verify  their  statement 
with  regard  to  the  non-uniformity  of  reports.  Unfortunately, 
the  work  of  this  Committee  seems  to  have  had  little  effect  upon 
the  reports  which  have  been  issued  since  1899.  The  sources  of 
information  concerning  school  expenditures  are:  the  Report  of 
the  Commissioner  of  Education  for  the  United  States,  the  sev- 
eral State  Reports,  and  the  City  Reports.  In  the  Report  of  the 
Commissioner  of  Education,  school  expenditures  for  cities  of 
over  8000  inhabitants  are  classified  under  four  heads,  namely: 
(1)  permanent  investment  and  lasting  improvements,  (2)  teach- 
ing and  supervision,  (3)  current  and  incidental  expenses,  and 
(4)  evening  schools.  It  is  hardly  necessary  to  state  that  if  any 
comparison  among  different  cities  is  to  be  made,  a  further  dis- 
tribution of  these  items  is  necessary. 

The  item  "teaching  and  supervision"  contains  several  items 
of  expenditure  which  should  be  compared  with  each  other; 
while  the  item  "current  and  incidental  expenses"  is  so  general 
that  we  are  unable  to  tell  anything  about  the  use  which  is  made 
of  the  money. 

If  we  turn  to  State  Reports  we  are  again  disappointed.  The 
Massachusetts  State  Report  classifies  city  school  expenditures 
under  the  following  heads:  teachers'  salaries;  conveyance  of 
pupils;  fuel  and  care  of  premises;  school  committee,  including 
clerical  aid  and  truant  service;  superintendent  of  schools;  text- 
books and  school  supplies;  school  sundries;  alterations  and 
permanent  repairs;  new  schoolhouses ;  and  ordinary  repairs. 
This  classification  is  superior  to  that  found  in  the  Report  of  the 
Commissioner  of  Education,  because  of  the  more  detailed  infor- 
mation which  it  gives.     One  might  wish,  however,  that  fuel  and 

1  Proceedings  of  the  National  Educational  Association,  1899,  p.  345. 


8  City  School  Expenditures 

the  care  of  school  premises  could  be  given  as  separate  items; 
and  when  we  remember  the  difference  in  the  salaries  paid  to 
high  school  teachers  and  to  elementary  school  teachers,  it  would 
seem  that  these  items  should  be  further  subdivided. 

In  the  Pennsylvania  State  Report  expenditures  are  classified 
as  follows:  schoolhouses,  purchasing,  building,  renting,  etc.; 
teachers'  wages;  cost  of  school  text -books;  cost  of  school  sup- 
plies other  than  text-books  including  maps,  globes,  etc. ;  fuel, 
contingencies,  fees  of  collectors,  and  all  other  expenses.  It  is 
easily  seen  that  the  Pennsylvania  Report  gives  less  definite  in- 
formation than  the  Massachusetts  Report,  and  that  a  comparison 
of  the  expenditures  for  cities  of  the  two  States  could  not  be 
made  from  the  material  available. 

The  New  Jersey  State  Report  classifies  expenditures  as  fol- 
lows: teachers' salaries ;  fuel  and  janitors' salaries;  building  and 
repairing;  debt  and  interest ;  manual  training;  text-books,  ap- 
paratus, and  supplies;  transportation  of  pupils;  other  school 
purposes.  Again  it  is  hardly  necessary  to  suggest  that  the  item 
"teachers'  salaries"  is  not  sufficiently  specific  for  the  purpose  of 
comparison.  It  may  be  well  enough  for  the  information  of 
patrons  to  account  for  fuel  and  janitors'  salaries  under  one  head, 
but  if  one  were  interested  in  the  relation  between  janitors'  sal- 
aries and  the  amount  of  fuel  consumed,  this  classification  would 
scarcely  answer  the  purpose. 

In  the  New  York  State  Reports  there  is  still  less  information 
given  concerning  the  money  expended  by  cities  for  school 
purposes. 

The  City  Reports,  so  far  as  I  have  been  able  to  examine  them, 
are  little  more  satisfactory  than  the  State  and  National  Reports. 
Items  which  are  given  in  one  report,  are  omitted  or  combined 
with  other  items  in  another  report  in  such  manner  as  to  make 
comparisons  impossible.  Frequently  there  is  included  under  a 
single  head  an  item  of  expenditure  which  properly  belongs  to 
current  expense  for  maintenance  and  operation,  and  another 
which  might  better  be  classified  as  falling  under  the  head  of 
permanent  equipment. 

In  about  half  of  the  reports  which  I  have  examined,  teachers' 
salaries  are  given  as  a  single  item.  Miscellaneous  expenses, 
that  is,  the  money  which  is  spent  but  not  definitely  accounted 
for,  amounts  to  from  one  to  twenty-five  per  cent,  of  the  entire 


City  School  Expenditures  g 

expenditure.  In  one  report,  school  furniture  and  rent  are  given 
as  one  item.  In  another,  janitors'  and  truant  officers'  salaries 
are  given  as  a  single  item,  without  any  explanation  as  to  whether 
the  janitor  acts  as  truant  officer  or  not.  Text-books,  supplies, 
permanent  equipment  or  apparatus  make  one  item  of  another 
report.  Fuel  and  repairs  are  grouped  together  in  another,  and 
so  on  through  the  entire  list.  Mr.  Jesse  D.  Burks,  in  an  unpub- 
lished study,  found  three  thousand  different  heads  under  which 
information  concerning  city  school  systems  was  given  in  the 
annual  reports. 

It  was  because  of  this  state  of  affairs  that  the  Committee  of 
the  National  Educational  Association  on  Uniform  Financial 
Reports  was  appointed;  and  it  was  with  the  same  problem  in 
view  that  President  Butler,  in  a  discussion  of  a  paper  on  "Taxa- 
tion and  Teachers'  Salaries"  before  the  National  Educational 
Association  in  1902,  said:  "What  we  need  and  need  very  badly 
in  this  country,  is  not  only  a  more  scientific  system  of  taxation, 
but  more  adequate  and  exact  information  as  to  what  should  be 
the  relative  cost  of  various  elements  in  the  disbursements  of  our 
cities,  towns,  and  villages.  For  example,  no  one  knows  just 
what  ought  to  be  the  normal  cost  of  the  public  school  system  of 
a  city  of  250,000  people.  We  know  how  rapidly  such  popula- 
tion increases,  and  how  many  children  of  school  age  come  under 
the  care  of  the  community  each  year,  but  we  do  not  know  what 
the  school  system  should  normally  cost,  or  what  should  be  the 
proportion  of  its  cost  to  the  total  cost  of  maintaining  the  local 
government.  Nor  do  we  know  what  proportion  of  a  city  school 
system  should  be  charged  to  teachers'  salaries,  what  to  supplies, 
what  to  supervision,  and  what  to  the  other  items  which  make 
up  the  total  bill  of  expense.  Here  is  a  field  of  investigation 
which  is  of  surpassing  interest,  not  only  to  school  officer  and 
superintendent,  but  to  every  intelligent  citizen.  It  cannot  be 
entered  upon  too  soon,  for  the  subject  is  one  that  goes  to  the 
very  bottom  of  our  public  life."  l 

The  problem  which  we  have  undertaken  in  this  investiga- 
tion is  a  part  of  that  which  President  Butler  so  clearly  outlined. 
This  study  will  deal  with  the  distribution  of  the  money 
spent  for  schools  among  the  various  items  of  the  budget. 
Whether  or  not  we  may  hope  to  determine  the  norm  which 

1  Proceedings  of  the  National  Educational  Association,  1002,  p.  329. 


10 


City  School  Expenditures 


should  be  followed,  of  this  we  are  certain,  that  some  informa- 
tion concerning  current  practice  can  be  secured,  and  that  a 
solution  to  some  of  the  problems  which  arise  may  be  suggested 
because  of  this  more  adequate  knowledge  of  present  conditions. 

DATA 

The  data  which  furnish  the  basis  of  this  study  were  secured 
from  fifty -eight  cities  of  between  ten  and  fifty  thousand  inhabi- 
tants, located  in  Massachusetts,  Rhode  Island,  Connecticut, 
New  York,  and  New  Jersey.  To  the  Superintendent  of  Schools 
in  each  city  the  following  blank  form  was  sent : 


©olurofria  xtlniujevsitu 

Data  for  research  in  Educational  Administration. 

tures  for  the  year  igo   and  igo  ,  in  the  city  of 

state  of  


School  Expendi- 


No. 


I.  Current  Expenses : 

i.  Salaries  for  supervision  (Superintendent,  Assistant,  Dep- 
uty, or  Associate  Superintendents,  and  Principals) 

2.  Salaries  for  business  administration  (salaries  of  members  of 

the  Board  of  Education,  Business  Manager,  Superinten- 
dent of  Buildings  and  Grounds,  Clerks  to  Board  of  Edu- 
cation, etc.,  etc.) 

3.  Salaries  of  Janitors  (number  and  aggregate  of  their 

salaries) 

4.  Salaries  of  Matrons  or  Maids  in  connection  with  Kin- 

dergartens and  Baths  (number  and  aggregate  of 
their  salaries) 

5.  Salaries  of  Truant  Officers  (number  and  aggregate  of 

their  salaries) 

6.  Salaries  for  Teaching: 

Number  of  Elementary  School  (Primary  and  Gram- 
mar) Teachers  and  aggregate  of  their  salaries .  . . 

Number  of  High  School  Teachers  and  aggregate  of 
their  salaries 

Number  of  Kindergarten  Teachers  and  aggregate  of 
their  salaries 

Number  of  Evening  School  Teachers  and  aggregate 
of  their  salaries 


City  School  Expenditures 


ii 


IO 


16. 

»?• 

18. 
19. 
20. 
21. 


5.  Salaries  for  Teaching:  {Continued.)  No.     $ 

Number  of  Truant  School  Teachers  and  aggregate 

of  their  salaries 

Number   of   Teachers'   Training   School   Teachers 

and  aggregate  of  their  salaries 

Number  of  Special  Teachers  or  supervisors  of  spe- 
cial subjects  (Manual  Training,  Cooking,  Sewing, 
Drawing,  Music,  Nature  Study,  Penmanship, 
Physical  Education,  etc.)  and  aggregate  of  their 

salaries '. ». . 

Number   of   Vacation    School    and    Play    Ground 

Teachers  and  aggregate  of  their  salaries 

What  are  the  daily  wages  of  (1)  Carpenters,  $ 

(2)  Bricklayers,  $ (3)  Day  Laborers,  $ 

in  your  city? 

7    Text-books,  including  copy-  and  drawing-books  and  re- 
pairs to  books 

8.  Supplies  consumed  by  pupils  (paper,  pencils,  ink,  chalk, 

pens  and  pen-holders,  erasers,  laboratory,  manual  train- 
ing, cooking,  and  kindergarten  supplies,  etc.,  etc.) 

9.  Janitors'  Supplies  (brooms,  brushes,  towels  and  washing  of 

towels,  toilet  paper,  soap,  etc.,  etc.) 

Supplies  for  Board  of  Education,  Superintendents',  and 
Principals'  offices 

11.  Fuel 

1 2 .  Light  and  Power 

13.  Water 

14.  Ordinary  repairs  to  Buildings  and  Grounds 

1 5 .  Rent 

School  Census 

Transportation  of  Pupils 

Insurance 

Freight  and  Expressage 

Printing  and  Advertising 

Telegraph,  Postage,  etc 

2  2 .  Telephone 

23.  Other  Current  Expenses: 


Are  books  furnished  free  to  indigents  ? to  all  stu- 
dents?  What  supplies  are  furnished  free  to  in- 
digents?   


to  all  students?. 


12 


City  School  Expenditures 


II.  Plant  and  Permanent  Equipment: 

i.  New  buildings  and  sites,  furniture  and  furnishings  for  new 
buildings,  and  permanent  improvements  to  buildings 
and  grounds 

2 .  Furniture  (exclusive  of  that  put  in  new  buildings) 

3.  Permanent  equipment  or  apparatus  (scientific  apparatus, 
tools  or  apparatus  for  manual  training  and  cooking,  type- 
writers for  commercial  departments,  maps,  charts,  globes, 
etc. ,  etc.) 

4.  Reference  and  Library  Books 

III.  Paid  on  Principal  of  Bonded  Debt 

IV.  Paid  on  Principal  of  Loans 

V.  Paid  for  Interest 

(If  important  expenditures  have  been  omitted  in  the  above 
classification,  will  you  kindly   itemize   such   expendi- 
tures below.) 

Total  Expenditures  for  the  year: 
VII.  Bonded  School  Debt  at  end  of  the  year 

VIII.  Paid  for  Evening  Schools  [total  current  expenses,  included  in 
,                     (I)  above] 

IX.  Paid  for  Teachers  Training  Schools  [total  current  expenses,  in- 
cluded in  (I)  above] 

Cities  of  between  ten  and  fifty  thousand  inhabitants  were 
chosen  because  this  is  the  type  city  in  the  United  States.  Of 
562  cities  of  over  eight  thousand  inhabitants,  according  to  the 
census  of  1900,  481  cities  are  between  eight  and  fifty  thousand. 
Not  only  is  the  city  above  fifty  thousand  much  less  common 
than  the  city  of  fewer  inhabitants,  but  it  is  more  apt  to  present 
problems  peculiar  to  itself,  and  hence  does  not  admit  so  well  of 
comparison.  Even  if  it  had  been  possible  to  secure  information 
from  as  many  of  the  larger  cities,  they  would  necessarily  have 
been  so  scattered,  and  conditions  of  climate,  rate  of  growth  in 
population,  general  economic  welfare,  tradition  with  regard  to 
public  education,  etc.,  would  have  been  so  different  that  a 
comparison  could  not  so  well  have  been  made. 

After  having  chosen  the  size  of  city  to  be  studied,  the  terri- 


City  School  Expenditures  13 

tory  was  limited  to  the  states  named  above  because  it  was  felt 
that  in  this  region  conditions  were  very  similar. 

In  the  territory  covered  there  are  117  cities  of  between  ten 
and  fifty  thousand.  For  the  school  year  1 902-1 903  the  blank 
form  given  above  was  filled  out  by  fifty-eight  cities.  For  the 
school  year  1 903-1 904  similar  data  were  secured  from  thirty  of 
these  cities  before  this  investigation  was  completed. 

The  form  of  report  used  was  drawn  up  with  two  purposes 
kept  constantly  in  mind,  namely:  first,  that  the  several- items 
of  expenditure  should  be"  so  reported  that  they  would  admit  of 
comparison;  second,  that  as  far  as  possible  the  whole  expendi- 
ture should  be  reported  under  proper  heads — that  the  item 
generally  termed  " miscellaneous  expenses"  should,  so  far  as 
possible,  be  eliminated.  It  will  be  noticed,  however,  that  a 
place  for  reporting  such  expenditures  was  allowed  to  remain  on 
the  blank.  In  preparing  this  form,  we  considered  carefully  the 
form  of  report  recommended  by  the  Committee  of  the  National 
Educational  Association,  and  have  in  some  parts  followed  their 
classification.  On  the  other  hand,  it  seemed  to  us  that  in  more 
than  one  instance  their  classification  was  not  the  best,  because 
it  did  not  provide  for  sufficient  detail.  The  first  item  under 
expenditures  in  that  report  is  salaries  of  teachers  and  super- 
visors. Now,  if  a  comparison  is  to  be  made,  it  seems  to  us  that 
this  item  needs  to  be  further  subdivided.  It  may  be  that  one 
city  is  paying  entirely  too  much  for  supervision.  We  may  want 
to  discover  if  there  is  any  relation  between  a  large  amount  of 
money  spent  for  supervision  and  the  amount  spent  for  school 
supplies.  In  order  to  discover  these  things,  it  will  be  necessary 
for  us  to  subdivide  the  item  of  "salaries." 

Again,  in  order  that  we  may  be  able  to  make  a  valid  com- 
parison, it  has  seemed  wise  to  divide  the  salaries  for  teaching 
into  several  items,  namely:  the  amount  paid  elementary  school 
teachers;  high  school  teachers;  kindergarten,  evening  school, 
truant  school,  and  teachers'  training  school  teachers;  special 
teachers,  or  supervisors  of  special  subjects;  and  teachers  in 
vacation  schools  and  play  grounds.  As  stated  above,  we  can 
only  compare  the  item  of  salaries  when  we  know  in  what  way 
that  money  was  spent. 

In  the  report  of  the  National  Educational  Association  Com- 
mittee, supplies  are  classified  under  two  heads — stationery  and 


14  City  School  Expenditures 

other  supplies  for  schools.  We  have  thought  it  best  to  classify 
all  supplies  consumed  by  pupils  under  a  single  head,  including 
in  this  item  paper,  pencils,  ink,  chalk,  pens,  pen-holders,  black- 
board erasers,  laboratory,  manual  training,  cooking,  and  kinder- 
garten supplies,  etc.  In  order  that  we  may  be  able  to  use  this 
item  and  that  of  text-books  intelligently,  our  form  contains  the 
following  questions :  Are  text-books  furnished  free  to  indigents  ? 
Are  they  furnished  free  to  all  pupils?  What  supplies  are  fur- 
nished free  to  indigents  ?  to  all  students  ? 

Other  supplies  are  classified  under  two  heads:  janitors'  sup- 
plies and  supplies  for  the  board  of  education,  superintendents', 
and  principals'  offices.  Besides  the  item  of  janitors'  salaries, 
we  include,  as  a  separate  item,  salaries  of  matrons  or  maids  in 
connection  with  the  kindergartens  or  baths. 

In  addition  to  the  item  of  fuel  and  light  (which  we  classify 
under  two  heads,  namely,  fuel,  and  light  and  power)  and  or- 
dinary repairs  to  buildings  given  in  the  National  Educational 
Association  Report,  we  have  seen  fit  to  classify  current  expenses 
under  the  following  additional  heads:  water;  rent;  school 
census;  transportation  of  pupils;  insurance;  freight  and  ex- 
pressage;  printing  and  advertising;  telephone,  telegraph,  postage, 
etc.;  and  other  current  expenses.  We  did  not  expect  that  all 
would  report  expenditures  under  each  of  the  above  heads,  but 
we  do  think  that  if  there  are  such  expenses  it  is  best  that  they 
be  reported  separately. 

Our  second  large  heading  we  have  designated  as  "plant  and 
permanent  equipment."  Under  this  head  we  make  four  sub- 
divisions, namely:  (i)  new  buildings  and  sites,  furniture  and 
furnishings  for  new  buildings,  and  permanent  improvements  to 
buildings  and  grounds;  (2)  furniture  exclusive  of  that  put  in 
new  buildings;  (3)  permanent  equipment  or  apparatus,  includ- 
ing scientific  apparatus,  tools  and  apparatus  for  manual  train- 
ing and  cooking,  typewriters  for  commercial  departments,  maps, 
charts,  globes,  etc. ;   (4)  reference  and  library  books. 

In  asking  for  the  amount  paid  on  principal  of  bonded  debt, 
on  principal  of  loans,  for  interest,  the  total  current  expenses  for 
evening  schools,  and  for  teachers'  training  schools,  we  have  fol- 
lowed the  recommendation  of  the  National  Educational  Asso- 
ciation Committee. 

In  another  part  of  the  report,  we  ask  for  the  wages  of  car- 


City  School  Expenditures  15 

penters,  bricklayers,  and  day  laborers  in  the  city  from  which 
information  is  received,  hoping  in  this  case  to  be  able  to  infer 
something  concerning  the  cost  of  living  in  that  city,  which  will 
in  turn  enable  us  to  form  a  correct  idea  concerning  the  salaries 
paid  to  teachers. 

Of  the  fifty-eight  cities  reporting  the  first  year,  thirty  were 
able  to  report  their  total  expenditure  under  the  classification 
given,  without  resorting  to  the  use  of  the  ambiguous  heading 
"miscellaneous."  Of  the  remaining  twenty -eight  cities,  sixteen 
reported  less  than  2  %  under  the  head  "miscellaneous";  ten 
others  reported  less  than  5  %;  and  the  remaining  cities  re- 
ported 5.14  %  and  6.75  %  for  unclassified  expenditures.  For  the 
second  year,  of  the  thirty  cities  reporting,  eighteen  report  nothing 
under  "miscellaneous";  and  of  the  remaining  twelve,  eight  re- 
port 1  %  or  less,  three  2  %,  and  one  3.76  %  under  this  head. 

In  order  to  compare  the  expenditures  in  the  different  cities 
with  but  two  years'  data,  it  seemed  best  to  base  all  compari- 
sons upon  the  cost  of  maintenance  and  operation,  that  is,  the  ex- 
penditures which  are  absolutely  necessary  in  order  to  keep  the 
schools  going,  together  with  the  amount  spent  for  keeping  the 
plant  in  proper  repair.  Under  this  head  we  included  furniture 
put  into  old  buildings,  that  is,  new  furniture  put  in  to  replace 
old ;  and  also  money  spent  for  apparatus  and  for  reference  and  li- 
brary books.  These  expenditures,  we  believe,  are  properly  classi- 
fied as  expenditures  for  maintenance  and  operation,  since  they 
seldom  represent  any  very  large  increase  in  permanent  equip- 
ment. In  the  printed  form  given  above,  they  were  placed  under 
"plant  and  permanent  equipment,"  because  the  writer  be- 
lieved that  it  was  customary  to  place  them  there  and  that 
proper  returns  could  be  most  easily  secured  by  classifying  them 
in  this  way.  To  have  taken  into  consideration  the  amount 
spent  for  new  buildings  or  grounds,  or  for  permanent  improve- 
ments, would  have  been  unfair  to  some  cities,  because  in  some 
cases  a  much  larger  proportion  of  such  expenditures  is  met  by 
an  issue  of  bonds  than  in  others.  The  item  of  interest  is  not 
included  in  the  cost  of  maintenance  and  operation  for  a  similar 
reason.  This  item  is  sometimes  included  in  the  public  school 
budget,  while  in  other  cases  it  is  paid  by  the  city.  On  this 
point  the  National  Educational  Association  Committee  on  Uni- 
form Financial  Reports  says : 

"Expenditures  seem  to  fall  into  three  classes:     the  usual 


1 6  City  School  Expenditures 

current  expenditures  necessary  for  the  maintenance  of  schools ; 
expenditures  for  sites,  buildings,  permanent  improvements  and 
equipment;  other  expenditures  which,  for  various  reasons,  are 
not  put  in  either  of  the  two  preceding  classes. 

"For  the  purpose  of  this  report  the  first  of  these  classes  is  by 
far  the  most  important,  for  it  would  probably  be  conceded  that 
from  this  item  of  current  expense  should  be  determined  the  cost 
of  education  per  child,  the  most  important  item  to  be  shown."  J 

After  having  determined  the  classification  to  be  used,  and 
that  the  total  expenditures  for  maintenance  and  operation 
should  serve  as  the  basis  for  comparison,  the  question  which 
next  arises  is,  "How  shall  the  separate  items  be  compared  as 
among  the  different  cities?"  It  has  been  common  to  compare 
the  expenditures  for  different  cities  on  the  basis  of  the  cost  per 
pupil  in  daily  attendance.  We  shall  use  this  method,  and,  in 
addition,  it  seems  well  to  compare  the  different  items  on  a 
slightly  different  basis,  namely,  the  cost  per  pupil  based  upon  a 
figure  half-way  between  the  average  daily  attendance  and  the 
average  daily  enrolment.  In  discussing  this  point,  the  National 
Educational  Association  Committee  on  Uniform  Financial  Re- 
ports says : 

"For  many  reasons  No.  39"  (average  number  in  daily  mem- 
bership, all  schools)  "seems  the  most  suitable  divisor.  If  com- 
puted in  a  uniform  manner,  the  figures  showing  number  in 
average  daily  membership  would  most  nearly  show  the  require- 
ments for  school  rooms,  furniture,  supplies,  and  teachers.  But 
it  is  not  true  that  these  figures  are  obtained  by  the  same  pro- 
cess, or  based  upon  the  same  facts,  in  the  different  school  sys- 
tems. Usage  varies  so  in  computing  membership  in  different 
schools — pupils  in  some  cases  being  counted  as  members  of  the 
schools,  when  in  other  cities  the  same  state  of  facts  would  cause 
the  child  to  be  considered  as  no  longer  a  member  of  the  school — 
that  fair  comparison  is  apparently  not  practicable  by  the  use 
of  this  divisor. 

"Your  committee  is  of  the  opinion  that  a  divisor  as  little 
subject  to  misunderstanding  as  possible,  and  one  based  upon 
facts  which  are  obtained  in  the  same  way  everywhere,  is  of  the 
first  importance.  The  members  believe  that  this  is  provided 
by  item  40,  average  number  in  daily  attendance,  all  schools, 
1  Report  of  the  National  Educational  Association,  i8gg,  p.  347. 


City  School  Expenditures  17 

and  we  have,  therefore,  made  that  item  the  divisor  to  be  used, 
in  connection  with  items  12  and  13,  to  obtain  what  shall  be 
known  as  the  'cost  of  education.' "  * 

The  school  must  provide  teachers,  buildings,  and  equipment 
for  more  than  the  average  daily  attendance,  and  yet  it  is  seldom 
that  provision  is  made  for  a  number  equal  to  the  average  daily 
enrolment.  It  seems,  therefore,  that  the  figure  half-way  be- 
tween the  two  is  a  better  figure  than  either  of  the  others.  It 
was  impossible  to  secure  the  figures  for  the  average  daily  enrol- 
ment in  some  cases,  and  for  this  reason  the  average  cost  per 
pupil  for  the  first  and  second  year  will  be  based  upon  the  average 
daily  attendance,  even  though  we  do  not  believe  it  is  so  good  a 
figure  as  the  other. 

Still  another  basis  for  comparison  recommends  itself — the 
apportionment  of  money  spent  for  specific  purposes  expressed 
in  per  cents  of  the  total  expenditures  for  maintenance  and 
operation.  This  last  classification  offers  a  particularly  interest- 
ing basis  for  comparison  and  is  entirely  free  from  obscurity. 
The  question  is  simply  one  of  distribution  of  the  money  that  is 
spent  among  the  several  items  of  the  budget.  Just  as  an  in- 
dividual may  spend  too  much  for  clothes,  for  food,  for  books, 
or  for  amusement,  in  the  same  manner  it  is  possible  for  a  city 
to  spend  too  great  a  proportion  of  its  money  for  janitors,  for 
fuel,  for  school  supplies,  or  even  for  supervision. 

The  information  which  has  been  collected  is  given  in  the 
tables  which  follow.  Throughout  the  study  each  city  is  known 
by  the  number  which  is  given  it  in  the  first  table. 

These  tables  (Tables  I  to  IX)  contain  every  fact  with  which 
we  work.  Any  one  can,  from  the  data  here  given,  repeat  all  our 
calculations.  Moreover,  it  may  happen  that  some  one  else  may 
wish  to  use  the  information  which  furnishes  the  basis  of  this 
study  for  a  different  purpose.  It  is  unfortunate  that  many 
studies,  involving  the  use  of  data  which  were  secured  with  con- 
siderable difficulty,  have  been  published  without  giving  the  data 
upon  which  the  conclusions  were  based.  Such  an  omission 
makes  it  impossible  for  any  one  else  to  verify  the  conclusions 
which  the  author  has  reached,  and  denies  to  others  the  use  of 
valuable  data  which  they  might  use  for  purposes  quite  as  im- 
portant as  those  for  which  the  information  was  first  collected. 

1  Report  of  the  National  Educational  Association,  i8qq,  pp.  349-352. 


TABLE  I 

Gross  expenditures  for  maintenance  and  operation  for  the  school  year  1902-03. 
Fifty-eight  cities  of  from  10,000  to  50,000  inhabitants  in  Massachusetts,  Rhode  Island, 
Connecticut,  New  York,  and  New  Jersey.     The  amounts  are  scored  in  dollars. 


— 

o 

o 

fa 

3 

| 

i 

•a 

a 

i 

0 

■4J 

to 
E 
a 

| 

O 

Books, 
plies. 

03 

% 

a 

d 

Hi 

1 

u 

1 

£ 

J 

H 

1 

0 

a 

0 

J 

•— > 

a) 
u 
H 

oj     p. 

S    sS 

c 

1 

19 

n 

& 

I 

be 

3 

I. 

76,252 

47,712 

2,200 

392 

5,033 

300 

3,919  2,531 

664 

83 

3,473 

359 

2. 

60,492 

38,015 

2,000 

150 

350 

2,690  662 

300 

10,163 

286 

3- 

52,708 

35,918 

2,100 

3,725 

3,235 

530 

2,481  2,399, 

4- 

153,729 

98,028 

16,570 

550 

10,950 

400 

5,194  4,449 

1,078 

7,357 

353 

5- 

121,400 

89,100 

2,700 

650 

8,000 

950 

7,300 

200 

300 

7,400 

600 

6. 

50,613 

36,860 

2,100 

2,660 

3,315 

100 

50 

2,079 

130 

7. 

85,975 

57,320 

7,600 

500 

9,113 

810 

2,401  3,596 

816 

3,560 

8. 

60,473 

35,150 

8,200 

8,675 

750 

3,000  900 

100 

200 

3,528 

100 

9- 

100,484 

66,883 

2,800 

1,080 

7,520 

500 

6,749 

9,414 

10 

217,991 

160,832 

3,683 

1,482 

12,886 

1,000 

5,011  7,052 

583 

913 

9,285 

572 

ii. 

82,100 

40,800 

9,490 

900 

7,500 

900 

5,500 

5,000 

500 

12. 

71,281 

45,775 

6,500 

5,402 

168 

2,075  2,660 

5,000 

13. 

95,802 

51,578 

16,660 

614 

6,587 

900 

2,493  2,706 

234 

6,309 

179 

14. 

39,960 

24,828 

2,000 

2,717 

100 

1,243  993 

109 

3,271 

200 

15. 

116,039 

82,062 

2,500 

550 

7,019 

200  4,607  4,607 

310 

7,801 

314 

16. 

25,639 

17,290 

2,000 

1,641 

350 

742  849 

1,297 

17. 

99,717 

62,645 

7,800 

600 

7,000 

400 

2,901  3,061 

30 

7,320 

815, 

18. 

43,570 

30,700 

1,950 

2,960 

100 

3,300 

2,800 

19. 

52,870 

33,250 

1,800 

350 

3,600 

70 

2,500  1,500 

3,800 

20. 

59,772 

42,730 

1,275 

3,080 

400 

1,422  929 

95 

5,896 

78 

21. 

52,178 

36,080 

6,575 

100 

3,070 

100 

800 

200 

100 

2,000 

100 

22. 

17,368 

12,856 

205 

727 

1,018 

259 

37 

714 

60 

23. 

45,745 

13,150 

13,450 

300 

6,839 

300 

4,531 

24. 

29,787 

19,296 

2,750 

450 

1,861 

200  422 

30 

30 

2,000 

136 

25. 

30,398 

21,250 

2,400 

1,500 

100  100 

30 

50 

2,000 

35 

26. 

95,064 

53,487 

15,920 

550 

5,580 

100 

1,922  2,899 

123 

91 

4,220 

143 

27. 

40,622 

22,812 

4,250 

2,951 

2,473  725 

1,899 

28. 

46,041 
56,374 

30,001 
34,745 

1,800 
1,640 

590 

3,328 
3,944 

300 
175 

1,732 

3,847 

640 

3,474 
2,870 

29. 

20 

18 


TABLE  I  (Continued) 

Gross  expenditures  for  maintenance  and  operation  for  the  school  year  1902-03 
Fifty-eight  cities  of  from  10,000  to  50,000  inhabitants  in  Massachusetts,  Rhode  Island, 
Connecticut,  New  York,  and  New  Jersey.     The  amounts  are  scored  in  dollars. 


o 

'"o 
u 

J 

1 

u 
I 

ui 
E 

'3 

a 

Rent. 
School  Census. 

'o 

C 
0 

0  p 

1 

6 
0 

1 

t/i 

§4 

•§)§• 

H 

9  J 

ST* 
■S3 

| 

O 
Pi   . 

JB  5 

i 

1 

ui 

9 
0 

u 

3 

01 

3  . 

O  W 

li 

li 

+j  • 

a  bo 

*»  S 

.ti  <U 

r 

I 

■ 

a 
a 
< 

Reference  and 
Library  Books. 

Evening  Schools 

(included  in  items 

already  given). 

i. 

4,018 

15  528  1,570 

337 

245 

53  220  1,248 

308  1,008 

35  1,503 

2. 

141 

3,249 

100  100  1,800 

35 

300 

150 

1,821 

3- 
4- 

5- 

581 

2,044 
5,087 

264  100 

237 

180 

50  449 

275 

546  1,306 

839 
1,556 

1,200 

400  1,260 

40 

400 

600 

300  3,200 

6. 

2,000 

750 

94 

79 

25 

20 

350 

762 

7. 

6,356 

100  2,000 

833  1' 

492 

43 

12 

283 

8. 

200 

2,278 

100  1,088 

369 

75 

150 

50 

60 

250 

150 

100  760 

9* 

550 

150 

150 

86  4,602 

794 

10. 

1,144  11,542 

250 

974 

528 

44 

zi. 

3,500 

400 

750 

750 

100  110 

10  150 

5,540 

200 

1,800 

12. 

2,500 

163  98 

690 

100 

150 

1,153 

13. 

520 

2,496 

140  100 

455  1,560  158 

156 

35 

5  1,2 

451 

204 

48  874 

14. 

2,811 

48  36 

646 

134 

76 

239 

298 

140 

70 

15. 

3,173 

800  125 

997 

159 

260 

33 

37 

100 

325 

16. 

300 

1,030 

50 

89 

635 

17- 

3,974 

85  1,000 

190 

333 

40 

75 

225 

332 

690 

200  1,924 

18. 

1,200 

60 

300 

50 

100 

25 

25 

19. 

200 

3,000 

125  1,500 

90 

100 

15 

20 

300 

650 

20. 

531 

2,192 

225 

190 

138 

32 

557 

522 

21. 

80 

2,000 

305 

50 

30 

20 

18 

400 

150  250 

22. 

1,148 

22  33 

25 

108 

5 

150 

23. 

280 

3,216 

213  120  1,440 

15 

675 

276 

940 

24. 

277 

873 

54 

618 

91 

15 

49 

377 

25U 

25. 

250 

1,800 

75 

250 

10 

250 

10  138 

50 

100 

26. 

523 

3,254 

556  281 

100  1,280 

76 

300 

50 

43 

500  3,065  808 

27. 

181 

957 

818  155 

50 

116 

369 

669 

412 

28. 

2,092 

216  194 

76  1, 

355 

532   1,690 

2Q. 

158 

6,008  126 

696 

266 

220 

669 

350 

19 


TABLE  I  {Continued) 

Gross  expenditures  for  maintenance  and  operation  for  the  school  year  1902-03. 
Fifty-eight  cities  of  from  10,000  to  50,000  inhabitants  in  Massachusetts,  Rhode  Island, 
Connecticut,  New  York,  and  New  Jersey.     The  amounts  are  scored  in  dollars. 


Jtj  •  M  13  CO   s  > 

1      *        1  as        f      s      *      I      |    211 * 


30.  110,846  74,946  3,000   800  7,013  1,000  1,892  3,087  765      5,481   206 


3i. 
32. 
33- 
34- 
35- 

70,593 
80,361 
21,515 
49,993 
104,414 

39,850 
44,437 
14,525 
32,176 
76,142 

2,000 
3,000 
2,750 
2,160 
2,100 

700 
700 
300 
600 
717 

4,650 
4,500 
1,320 
4,060 
6,811 

800 
400 
78 
780 
750 

3,957 
852  1,500 
149 
25  458 
90 

301 

38 

300 

411 

1,500 

25 

200 

260 

8,826  225 
5,249  592 
1,072   35 
5,025  108 
5,916  282 

36. 
37. 
38. 
39- 

38,677 
50,462 
24,278 

51,887 

22  809 
29,874 
15,686 
32,305 

6,700 
8,502 
1,800 
5,750 

300 
1,017 

500 

1,340 

2,656 

934 

2,700 

120 
250 
400 
400 

250   80 
1,043 
50  100  155 
909  400 

20 
50 

2,000  271 
3,024 

1,336 

3,416 

40. 

54,614 

34,362 

2,225 

694 

2,172 

450 

945  2,282 

177 

4,804 

41. 
42. 
43- 
44- 
45- 

87,209 
89,467 
62,348 
48,410 
88,459 

56,574 
48,525 
40,642 
30,852 
59,334 

3,662 
13,900 
2,200 
2,200 
2,000 

1,626 

1,000 

397 

300 

150 

4,004 
4,684 
4,143 
2,930 
4,730 

84 

1,000 

500 

420 

600 

4  952 
4,500  3,500 
1,166  1,053 

569 
4,815  1,071 

126 
500 
431 
61 
250 

20 

67 
750 
150 

5,294  418 

5,000 
5,520  236 
4,844  234 
3,343  806 

46. 
47- 

107,537 
58,427 
18,402 
14,877 
81,954 

66,153 
16,294 
10,745 
9,512 
51,099 

12,200 
9,500 
1,800 
1,800 
5,700 

800 

2,108 

200 

100 

1,400 

4,930 
4,931 
1,100 
600 
2,775 

540 
500 
244 
200 
500 

3,076  1,854  1,008 
1,950     1,620 

500 

4,229   128 
9,411   347 

48. 
49. 
50. 

787  250 

771   150 

3,685  1,303 

40 
100 
150 

30 
52 

1,131   41 

814 
5,128  214 

51. 
52. 

64,465 
100,305 

42,350 
52,500 

8,950 
6,625 

650 
725 

3,525 
7,000 

425 
600 

1,200  300 
3,000  3,500 

150 
625 

50 
450 

3,600   70 
4,500 

53. 

144,783 

96,925 

17,700 

1,000 

9,990 

7,057 

1,397 

4,034 

54- 
55- 

75,700 
35,800 

42,225 
22,000 

8,100 
1,200 

950 
200 

4,200 
1,900 

400 

2,900  3,450 
2,000 

600 

250 

3,750  800 
2,000  200 

56. 
57. 
58. 

50,192 

114,800 

77,200 

27,415 
74,375 
48,650 

8,175 

11,400 

7,455 

400 

2,150 

500 

4,200 
5,425 
4,180 

150 

800  929 
3,000  5,000 
5,000   ] 

600 

250 

L,000 

844 
250 
500 

2,195  203 
4,500  500 
2,500  200 

20 


TABLE  I  {Continued) 

Gross  expenditures  for  maintenance  and  operation  for  the  school  year  1902-03. 
'ifty-eight  cities  of  from  10,000  to  50,000  inhabitants  in  Massachusetts,  Rhode  Island, 
!onnecticut,  New  York,  and  New  Jersey.     The  amounts  are  scored  in  dollars. 


I          r  ■* "..■:*■*  I      4  I-  -I  3       H  Slg 

fg       §  !|      Sj    i6 1  IS  4  8       R  c8.S-& 

3       •*           g|       1  if    lg    |»    &  1&  §*  afc2  B£% 

"    I      1*1  IS  gl  I    I  Jl  It  <   31  il g 


a 


8,157  75         931  660    351     1,021  201  1,261   675 

4  522  250  270       194  370     96  2,551  886  446    2,047 

8  541  300      424  151  644    240  3,014  2,000  500  1,516 

1,011  62       50   9  55  21      15 

730  266  250  730  615     96  239  850  325 

2,915  185      370  75  678  80  249  4,202  590  696  903 

218   877  125      400  75  25  25  100      494  230  326 

1,179  100  291       1,646  878 

2,386  50      279  25  148  21     319   50  189  300 

2,200  98  949     60  2,200 

396  1,909  72       799  47  1,102  703   283  1,190 

li.   763   156  1,585  201   91  616  193  229  138  194  100  523  1,277 

L2.  1,000  2,500  1,006  75  260  50  150     1,000  500  317 

369  1,546  100  259  171   31  25  310  52  39  1,734  417  528  407 

393  2,079  1,116  595  94  130  30         284  335  194 

6,139  982  108  780    100  1,452  395  150  443 

l6.  360  2,787  3,870  277     197  571108  485  108  1,500  600  656  619 

L7.   120  7,706  382        1,048  662  188    1,196  100  364  844 

96   275  450  50       84  30  291  10     591   68  41   50 

27   198  35       87  26  17   6      41   135  133   73 

5,642  1,000  318  193  50  508  150  10     1,729  369 

1,200  50       595  35  125  25  90       75  500  500 

15,000  1,200  700  800   100  1,800  1,000  180 

4,681  1.999  2,495 

3475  350  600  275  350  50  275  915  350  1,675  280  1,950 

1,000  3,500  500  500  400 

2  683  284  152    119  443  300  100  200 

5  000  250  250  300  150        1,000  500  500  650 

350  4,000  850          100   5  100  10  200  100  1,500 


TABLE  II 

Gross  expenditures  for  maintenance  and  operation  for  the  school  year  1903-04, 
thirty  of  the  cities  which  reported  for  1902-03  reporting.  The  amounts  are  scored 
in  dollars. 


ft  3  | 

ft  1*C 


if!  2  3  •§  2  «  •  °« 

1    4     1      S     a  i-  i  :  5     !     -g    *l!  £ 


6 


w  2  "Jco 

2  H  -I        -g-2 


5.  124,160  90,100  2,700   640  8,400  920  3,500  1,200  200   200  10,000   800 

6.  44,648  26,957  2,100      2,970  50  1,000  2,000  150  3,500   175 
8.  63,749  44,554  2,100      3,675  750  3,000   600  100   100  3,500 

13.  114,634  70,099  15,455   500  6,518  1,000  2,663    3,434  7,548 

14.  41,793  26,935  2,000      3,306  101  1,043  1,319  47  3,565 

15.  116,108  70,129  18,020   675  7,390  200  2,490  3,928  168   98  6,783   229 

16.  26,918  18,381  2,000      1,819  200   442   897  1,899 

20.  59,423  43,106  1,800      3,256  400  2,000  1,181  123  5,011    61 

27.  40,637  22,598  5,686      3,217  2518  902    74 

28.  47,036  31,195  1,800   570  3,328  300    1395  6,303* 

29.  50,616  32,349  1,547   250  4,263   146  4,037 3,067    45 

30.  117,263  78,771  3,000   850  7,342  1,100  1,978  3,263  5,055   188 

31.  77,025  50,751  2,000   700  5,075  800   536  7,766   113 

32.  68,924  38,100  11,300   750  5,000  400  1,100   800  500   348  4,150   541 

34.  45,412  29,105  2,000   600  4,857  780   52  663  1,070  1,639 

35.  123,116  89,360  6,775      5,870  810   100   500  407   300  7,808   149 

36.  38,904  26,070  6,500   300  1,424  200       250  75   20  2,500   192 

37.  53,161  31,107  9,283  1,121  2,790  250  664  100  4,198  24 
39-  46,859  29,000  5,950   480  2,580  400      1,454  626  1,113  3065 

40.  54,556  27,563  9,850  1,200  1,980  450  1,475  2,080  274  3248 

41.  90,956  51,597  12,830  1,637  4,123  68   5,035  280   191  6,684   282 

42.  92,550  50,050  14,600  4,784  1,000  4,690  3,803  606  1,051  4,400  221 
43-  71,995  51,961  2,200  491  4,527  500  1,500  653  585  100  2,210  239 
45-  91,573  61,140  5,800  1,200  5,255  600  3,573  1,500  500  400  3,709  900 
48.  23,806  13,454  3,425   250  1,290  300   854   830  30   200  1,215    25 

52.106,235  63,885  5,950  2,300  8,400  1,000  4,200  3,500  500   350  4,000  1,000 

54.  70,496  36,716  8,450   600  3,736  5,450  7,275  150  4,086 

55.  32,000  21,525  2,000   200  1,900  1,800   150  50  1,500   400 

56.  49,888  33,525  2,200  400  4,150  100  900  1,200  500  100  2,195  203 
57.120,163  77,915  11,500  2,150  6,725  3,000  4,375 4,750   800 

*  Including  repairs. 


22 


TABLE  II  (Continued) 

Gross  expenditures  for  maintenance  and  operation  for  the  school  year  1903-04, 
thirty  of  the  cities  which  reported  for  1902-03  reporting.  The  amounts  are  scored 
in  dollars. 


t*     \  4  2_.     Si  g     d  11   II? 


5-  1,200     400  1,400      125  150  75  50  1,300  200  500  100  2,300 

6.  4,000     75  750   450  116  75  50  30  200  852 

8.  180  2,200     100  1,211   500  50  200  75  205  50  600  400 

13.  600  2,733  117  360   939  168  2,500  756 

14.  1,972  130  39  675   193  173  111  24  18  110   30 

15.  3,287  800  125  893  100  354  36  35  267  100 

16.  300  786     50  144  612 
20.  1,415  158  185    345  692  628 

27.  182  1,500  500  526            17  1,494  645  330  131 

28.  6,303  198  1,228  718    2,733 

29.  176  2,592     125  788      184  211   434  400 

30.  10,822  75  985    355  427  1,995  1,057 

31.  7,025  290  543  214   "  99  447  667  1,277 

32.  2,500  240  850  201  251    240  600  800  250 

34.  2,326  250  1,500  25         96  50  200  200 

35.  6,069  795  50  300  100  240  1,273  1,566  744  800 

36.  210  50  60  168  60  75  15  100  410  75  150 
37-  2,415  504  379  .  100  225 

39.  1,871  209            60 

40.  403  2,051  50    1,318     60  2,036  518 

41.  568  3,252  200  182  139  367  59  26  2,280  572  585 

42.  604  3,120  751  99  213  110  1,068  750  630 
43-  559  2,095  100  730  50  437  100  141  1,705  552  277  384 
45-  4,634  350  200  762  100  438  388  175  350 
48.  40  920     30  100  540  40  60  100  103 

52.  5,000  2,500  650  700  100  1,000  1,000  200 

54-  2,000  350   443  50  100  25  200  614  256 

55-  400  100  10  75  790  600  500 

56.  1,800  283  200  152  50  119  310  1,000  200  300  1,000 

57-  5,000  900  250  500  200  100  500  900  400  200  750 


23 


TABLE  III 

The  amounts  spent  for  each  item  expressed  as  per  cents  of  the  total  amount  spent 
for  maintenance  and  operation.     Fifty-eight  cities,  for  the  school  year  1902-03. 


umber  of  City. 
Teaching. 

jj 
3 
f 

u 

a 

M 

u 

a 

i 

1 

CO 

C 

i 

0 

1 

Text  Books. 
Supplies. 

to* 

•<u 

"ft 
ft 

03 

"to 
u 

& 

G 

h 

rt  0 
u-t  IT  ft 

1 

1 

i 

bo 

| 

i 

8 
a 

2 

fc 

H 

1 
•-> 

a 

I.    62.6 

2.9 

.5 

6.6 

.4 

5.1     3.3 

.9 

.1 

4.6 

.5 

5.3 

2.   63.1 

3.3 

.3 

.6 

4.5     1.1 

.5 

16.8 

.5 

.2 

5.4 

3.   68.2 

4.0 

7.1 

6.1 

1.0 

4.7 

4.6 

3.9 

4.  63.7 

10.7 

.4 

7.1 

.3 

3.4     2.9 

.7 

4.8 

.2 

.4 

3.3 

5-  73.7 

2.2 

.5 

6.6 

.8 

6.0 

.2 

.3 

6.1 

.5 

1.0 

6.  72.9 

4.2 

5.3 

6.6 

.2 

.1 

4.1 

.3 

4.0 

7.  59.8 

7.9 

.5 

9.5 

.8 

2.5     3.7 

.8 

3.7 

6.6 

8.  58.1 

13.6 

6.1 

1.2 

5.0     1.5 

.2 

.3 

5.8 

.2 

.3 

3.8 

9.   66.9 

2.8 

1.1 

7.5 

.5 

6.7 

9.4 

.5 

.1 

io.   73.8 

1.7 

.7 

5.9 

.5 

2.3     3.2 

.2 

.4 

4.3 

.3 

.5 

5.3 

ii.  49.7 

11.6 

9.1 

17.4 

1.0 

.6 

9.1 
7.6 
6.9 

1.0 
.2 
.9 

1 

6.7 

6.1 
7.0 
6.6 

.6 
.2 

.5 

4.3. 

12.  64.2 

3.5 

3.7 

3.5 

13.  53.9 

2.6     2.8 

.2 

2.6 

14.   62.5 

5.0 

6.8 

.3 

3.1     2.5 

.3 

8.2 

.5 

7.1 

15.  71.2 

2.2 

.5 

6.2 

.2 

4.0     4.0 

.3 

6.7 

.2 

2.7 

16.   67.5 

7.8 

6.4 

1.4 

2.9     3.3 

5.1 

1.2 

4.0 

17.  62.8 

7.8 

.6 

7.0 

.4 

2.9     3.1 

7.3 

.8 

4.0 

18.  70.4 

4.5 
3.4 

.7 

6.8 
6.8 

.2 
.1 

7 

.6 

6.4 
7.2 

.4 

2.7 

19.  62.9 

4.7     2.8 

5.7 

20.  71.5 

2.1 

5.2 

.7 

2.4     1.2 

.2 

9.9 

.1 

.9 

3.7 

21.  69.1 

12.6 

.2 

5.9 

.2 

1.5 

.4 

.2 

3.8 

.2 

.2 

3.8 

22.  73.9 

1.2 

4.2 

5.9 

1.5 

.2 

4.1 

.4 

6.6 

23.  28.8 

29.4 

.7 

14.9 

.7 

9.9 

.6 

7.0 

24.   64.7 

9.2 

1.5 

6.3 

.7     1.4 

.1 

.1 

6.7 

.5 

.9 

2.9 

25.   69.9 

7.9 

4.9 

.3        .3 

.1 

.2 

6.6 

.1 

.8 

5.9 

26.  56.2 

16.7 

.6 

5.9 

.1 

2.0     3.1 

.1 

.1 

4.4 

.2 

.5 

3.4 

27.  56.2 

10.4 

1.1 

7.9 

6.1     1.8 

4.7 

.4 

2.8 

28.   65.2 

3.9 
2.9 

1.3 

7.2 
7.0 

.7 
.3 

3.8 

6.8 

1.1 

7.5 
5.1 

4.6 

29.   61.6 

.1 

.3 

TABLE  III  {Continued) 

The  amounts  spent  for  each  item  expressed  as  per  cents  of  the  total  amount  spent 
for  maintenance  and  operation.     Fifty-eight  cities,  for  the  school  year  1902-03. 


0 

43  . 

1 

•8 

2 

■t-» 

1 

03 

3 

6 

1 

d 
.2 

Jq 

t  9. 

0  3 

§ 

4) 
OS 

fl 

11 

wj.52 

Ji 

5J  J) 

Si 

| 
g 

3 

to" 

6 

1 

Pi 
J 
3 

10 

g  . 
0  10 

ii 
II 

S.? 

p 

as 
£1 

w 
9 

| 
E 

1 

a 
a 
< 

•d  w 

h 

«3 

i. 

.1 

2.1 

.4 

.3 

.1 

.3 

1.6 

.4 

1.5 

.1 

2. 

.2 

.2 

3.0 

.1 

.5 

.3 

3- 

.5 

4- 

.2 

.1 

.2 

.1 

.3 

.3 

.8 

5- 

.3 

1.1 

.3 

.5 

.3 

6. 

.2 

1.5 

.2 

.2 

.1 

.7 

7. 

.1 

2.1 

.9 

.1 

.5 

.1 

.3 

8. 

.2 

1.8 

.6 

.1 

.3 

.1 

.1 

.4 

.3 

.2 

9. 

.1 

.1 

4.6 

10. 

.1 

.5 

.2 

ii. 

.5 

.9 

.9 

.1 

.1 

.2 

6.8 

.2 

12. 

.2 

.1 

1.0 

.1 

.2 

13. 

.2 

.1 

.5 

1.6 

.2 

.2 

.1 

.8 

.5 

.1 

14. 

.1 

.1 

1.7 

.3 

.2 

.6 

.7 

.4 

.2 

15. 

.7 

.1 

.9 

.1 

.2 

.1 

.3 

.1 

16. 

.2 

.4 

17. 

.1 

1.0 

.2 

.3 

.1 

.2 

.3 

.7 

.2 

18. 

.1 

.7 

.1 

.2 

.1 

.1 

19. 

.2 

2.8 

.2 

.2 

.6 

1.2 

20. 

.4 

.3 

.2 

.1 

.9 

21. 

.6 

.1 

.1 

.7 

.3 

22. 

.1 

.2 

.1 

.6 

.9 

23. 

.5 

.3 

3.2 

1.5 

.6 

2.1 

24. 

.2 

2.1 

.3 

.1 

.2 

1.3 

8 

25. 

.3 

.8 

.8 

.5 

.2 

.3 

26. 

.6 

.3 

.1 

1.4 

1 

.3 

.1 

.5 

3.2 

27. 

2.0 

.4 

.1 

.3 

4.4 

.9 

1.7 

1.0 

28. 

.5 

.4 

.2 

2.9 

.8 

■ 

L.2 

29. 

10.8 

.2 

1.2 

.5 

4 

1.2 

.6 

25 


TABLE  III  {Continued) 

The  amounts  spent  for  each  item  expressed  as  per  cents  of  the  total  amount  spent 
for  maintenance  and  operation.     Fifty-eight  cities,  for  the  school  year  1902-03. 


>. 

.2 

•2  2 

4) 

Number  of  Cit 
Teaching. 

8 

•a 

| 

& 

4 

0 

■1 

O 

s 
1 

Text  Books. 
Supplies. 

I 

"in 
8 

1 

38  . 

C>-r«  CO 

w|§ 

H 
0 

n 

1 
ft 

1 

9 

i 

"5 
> 

1 

1 

30.   68.4 

2.7 

.7 

6.3 

.9 

1.7     2.8 

.7 

4.9 

.1 

7.4 

31.  56.5 

2.8 

1.0 

6.6 

1.1 

5.6 

12.5 

.3 

6.4 

32.  55.3 

3.7 

.9 

5.6 

.5 

1.1     1.9 

.4 

1.9 

6.5 

.7 

10.6 

33.   67.5 

12.8 

1.4 

6.1 

.3 

.7 

.2 

.1 

4.9 

.1 

4.7 

34.  64.5 

4.3 

1.2 

8.1 

1.6 

.1       .9 

.6 

.4 

10.0 

.2 

1.5 

35-  73.2 

2.0 

.7 

6.6 

.7 

.1 

.4 

.3 

5.7 

.2 

2.8 

36.  59.0 

17.4 

.8 

3.5 

.3 

.6 

.2 

.1 

5.2 

.7 

.6 

2.3 

37-  59.2 

16.9 

2.0 

5.3 

.5 

2 

.1 

6.0 

2.3 

38.  64.5 

7:4 

3.8 

1.7 

.2       .4 

.6 

.2 

5 

5 

9.8 

39.  62.3 

11.1 

1.0 

5.2 

.8 

1.8 

.8 

6 

.6 

4.2 

40.  63.2 

4.0 

1.3 

3.9 

.8 

1.7     4.1 

.3 

8.7 

.7 

3.5 

41.  64.9 

4.2 

1.9 

4.6 

.1 

5.7 

.1 

6.1 

.5 

.9 

.2 

42.  54.2 

15.5 

1.1 

5.2 

1.1 

5.0     3.9 

.6 

5.6 

1.1 

2.8 

43-  65.3 

3.5 

.6 

6.7 

.8 

1.9     1.7 

.7 

.1 

8.9 

.4 

.6 

2.5 

44-  63.8 

4.6 

.6 

6.1 

.9 

1.2 

.1 

1.5 

10.0 

.5 

.8 

4.3 

45.  67.1 

2.3 

.2 

5.3 

.7 

5.4     1.2 

.3 

.2 

3.8 

.9 

6.9 

46.  61.3 

11.3 

.7 

4.6 

.5 

2.9     1.7 

.9 

.5 

3.9 

.2 

.3 

2.6 

47-  27.9 

16.3 

3.6 

8.4 

.9 

3.3 

2.8 

16.1 

.6 

.2 

13.2 

48.  58.4 

9.8 

1.1 

6.0 

1.3 

4.3     1.4 

.2 

.2 

6.2 

.2 

.5 

1.5 

49.  63.9 

12.1 

.7 

4.0 

1.3 

5.2     1.0 

.7 

.4 

5.5 

.2 

1.3 

50.  62.9 

7.0 

1.7 

3.4 

.6 

4.5     1.6 

.2 

6.3 

.3 

6.9 

51.  65.7 

13.9 

1.0 

5.5 

.7 

1.9       .5 

.2 

.1 

5.6 

.1 

1.9 

52.  52.3 

6.6 

.7 

7.0 

.6 

3.0     3.5 

.6 

.4 

4.4 

15.0 

53-   66.9 

11.8 

.7 

6.9 

4.9 

1.0 

2.8 

3.2 

54.  56.0 

10.7 

1.3 

5.6 

3.8     4.6 

.8 

.3 

5.0 

1.1 

4.2 

55.  61.5 

3.4 

.6 

5.3 

1.1 

5.6 

5.6 

.6 

2.8 

56.  54.6 

16.3 

.8 

8.4 

.3 

1.6     1.8 

1.2 

1.7 

4.4 

.4 

5.3 

57.  64.7 

9.9 

1.9 

4.7 

2.6     4.4 

.2 

2.0 

3.9 

.4 

4.4 

58.  63.1 

9.7 

.7 

5.4 

1.0 

6.5 

1.3 

.7 

3.2 

.3 

.5 

5.2 

26 


TABLE  III  (Continued) 

The  amounts  spent  for  each  item  expressed  as  per  cents  of  the  total  amount  spent 
for  maintenance  and  operation.     Fifty-eight  cities,  for  the  school  year  1902-03. 


o 

1 

c 

B 

3 

3 

1 

g 

11 

1 

8 
a 

11 

ji 

*    . 

f 

to 

u 

g 

-a 

■ 

2 

11 

.a 

P.  60 

if 
h 

1 

Apparatus. 

Reference  and 
Library  Books. 

30. 

.8 

.6 

.3 

.9 

.2       1.1 

3i- 

.4 

.4 

.3 

.5 

.1 

3.6 

1.3 

.6 

32. 

.4 

.5 

.2 

.8 

.3 

3.7 

2.5 

.6      1.9 

33- 

.3 

.2 

.1 

.3 

.1 

.1 

34. 

.5 

.5 

1.5 

1.2 

.2 

.5 

1.7 

.7 

35. 

.2 

.4 

.1 

.7 

.1 

.2 

4.0 

.6 

.7         .9 

36. 

.3 

1.0 

.2 

.1 

.1 

.3 

4.9 

1.3 

.6         .8 

37- 

.2 

.6 

3.3 

1.7 

38. 

.2 

1.2 

.1 

.6 

.1 

1.3 

.2 

'    .8      1.2 

39. 

.2 

1.8 

.1 

4.2 

40. 

.1 

1.5 

.1 

2.0 

1.3 

.5 

2.2 

41. 

1.8 

.2 

.1 

.7 

.2 

.3 

.2 

.2 

5.1 

.6 

1.5 

42. 

1.1 

.1 

.3 

.1 

.2 

1.1 

.6         .4 

43- 

.2 

.4 

.3 

.1 

.1 

.5 

.1 

.1 

2.8 

.7 

.9         .7 

44. 

2.3 

1.2 

.2 

.3 

.1 

.6 

.7         .4 

45. 

1.1 

.1 

.9 

.1 

1.6 

.4 

.2         .5 

46. 

3.6 

.3 

.2 

.5 

.1 

.5 

.1 

1.4 

.2         .6 

47- 

.7 

1.8 

1.1 

.3 

2.0 

.2         .6 

48. 

2.5 

.3 

.5 

.2 

1.6 

.1 

3.2 

.4 

.2         .3 

49. 

.2 

.6 

.2 

.1 

.1 

.3 

.9 

.9         .5 

50. 

1.2 

.4 

.2 

.1 

.6 

.2 

2.1 

5i. 

.1 

.9 

.1 

.2 

.1 

.1 

.1 

.8         .8 

52. 

1.2 

.7 

.8 

1.8 

1.0         .2 

53- 

1.4 

54- 

.5 

.8 

.4 

.5 

.1 

.4 

1.2 

.5 

2.2         .4 

55. 

9.8 

1.4 

1.4      1.1 

56. 

.3 

.2 

.9 

.6 

.2         .4 

57. 

.2 

.2 

.3 

.1 

.8 

.3         .4 

58. 

.1 

.3 

.1       1.9 

27 


TABLE  IV 

The  amounts  spent  for  each  item  expressed  as  per  cents  of  the  total  amount  spent 
for  maintenance  and  operation.     Thirty  cities,  for  the  school  year  1903-04. 


>> 
o 

<M 

o 

u 

§ 

do 

i 

1 
| 

1 

i 

0 

0 
1 

2 
8 

0 
I 

1 

0 

n 

8 

to 

.a 
"p. 
5 

CO 

.2} 
*P< 

s 

CO 

S 

2 

1 

cfl  0 

■S'EJ 

M-l    3   ft 

m 

"3 

1 

ft. 

g 

I 

5- 

72.7 

2.2 

.5 

6.8 

.7 

2.8 

1.0 

.2 

.2 

8.1 

.6 

6. 

60.5 

4.7 

6.7 

2.2 

4.5 

.3 

7.8 

.4 

8. 

70.0 

3.3 

5.8 

1.2 

4.7 

.9 

.1 

.2 

5.5 

.3 

13- 

60.9 

13.4 

.4 

5.7 

.9 

2.3 

3.0 

6.6 

.5 

14. 

64.4 

4.8 

7.9 

.2 

2.5 

3.2 

.1 

8.5 

15. 

60.5 

15.6 

.6 

6.4 

.2 

2.1 

3.4 

.1 

.1 

5.8 

.2 

16. 

68.3 

7.4 

6.8 

.7 

1.6 

3.3 

7.1 

1.1 

20. 

73.0 

3.0 

5.5 

.7 

3.4 

2.0 

.2 

7.4 

.1 

27. 

55.6 

14.0 

1.1 

7.9 

6 

.2 

2.2 

.2 

.4 

28. 

66.4 

3.8 

1.2 

7.1 

.6 

3 

.0 

13.4 

29. 

63.9 
67.3 
65.9 

3.1 
2.6 
2.6 

.5 

.7 
.9 

8.4 
6.3 
6.6 

.3 

.9 

1.0 

8.0 

6.1 

4.3 

10.1 

.1 
.2 
.1 

.3 

30. 

1.7 

.7 

2.8 

3i. 

32. 

55.3 

6.4 

1.1 

7.3 

.6 

1.6 

1.2 

.7 

.5 

6.0 

.8 

34. 

64.0 

4.4 

1.3 

10.7 

1.7 

.1 

1.5 

2.4 

3.6 

35- 

72.6 

5.5 

4.8 

.6 

.1 

.4 

.3 

.2 

6.3 

.1 

36. 

68.2 

17.1 

.8 

3.7 

.5 

.6 

.2 

.1 

6.5 

.5 

.5 

37- 

58.8 

17.6 

2.1 

5.3 

.5 

1.3 

.2 

7.9 

.1 

39- 

62.0 

12.7 

1.0 

5.5 

.8 

3.1 

1.3 

2.4 

6 

.5 

40. 

50.9 

18.2 

2.2 

3.7 

.8 

2.7 

.5 

3.8 

6 

.0 

.7 

41. 

56.8 

14.1 

1.8 

4.5 

.1 

5. 

5 

.3 

.2 

7.3 

.3 

.6 

42. 

54.1 

16.0 

5.2 

1.1 

5.1 

4.1 

.6 

1.1 

4.8 

.2 

.6 

43. 

72.2 

3.1 

.7 

6.3 

.7 

2.1 

.9 

.8 

.1 

3.1 

.3 

.8 

45. 

66.8 

6.3 

1.3 

5.7 

.7 

3.9 

1.6 

.5 

.4 

4.0 

1.0 

48. 

56.5 

14.4 

1.0 

5.4 

1.3 

3.6 

3.5 

.1 

.8 

5.1 

.1 

.2 

52. 

60.2 

5.6 

2.2 

7.9 

.9 

4.9 

3.3 

.5 

.3 

3.8 

.9 

54- 

52.1 

12.0 

.8 

5.3 

7.7 

10.3 

.2 

5. 

8 

55- 

67.3 

6.2 

.6 

5.9 

5.6 

.5 

.2 

4.7 

1.2 

56. 

67.2 

4.4 

.8 

8.3 

.2 

1.8 

2.4 

1.0 

.2 

4.4 

.4 

57. 

64.9 

9.6 

1.8 

5.6 

2.5 

3.6 

4.0 

7 

2S 


TABLE  IV  (Continued) 

The  amounts  spent  for  each  item  expressed  as  per  cents  of  the  total  amount  spent 
for  maintenance  and  operation.     Thirty  cities,  for  the  school  year  1903-04. 


'6 

u 

z 

B 

B 

a 
(4 

§ 

I 

1 

i 

0  p 

1 

8 
§ 

21 

|i 
IS 

a> 
fi 

1 

.  0 

p 

M 

2 

m 

9 
d 
0 

| 

3 

■ 
3 . 

O  ta 

C  w 

*3  P. 

r 

5^ 
aw 

II 

.1=  <u 

fe 

en 

3 

ft 

< 

§1 

5- 

1.0 

.3 

1.1 

1.0 

1.2 

.1 

1.0 

.2 

.4 

.1 

6. 

9.0 

.2 

1.7 

1.0 

.3 

.2 

.1 

.1 

.4 

8. 

3.4 

.2 

1.9 

.8 

.1 

.3 

.1 

.3 

.1 

.9 

13- 

2.4 

.1 

.3 

.8 

.1 

2.2 

14. 

4.7 

.3 

.1 

1.6 

.5 

.4 

.2 

.1 

.1 

.3 

.1 

15. 

2.8 

.7 

.1 

.8 

.1 

.3 

.2 

.1 

16. 

2.9 

.2 

.5 

.3 

20. 

2.4 

.3 

.1 

1.2 

27. 

4.9 

1.3 

3.7 

1.6 

.8 

28. 

.4 

2.6 

1. 

5 

29. 

5.1 

.2 

1.6 

.4 

.4 

.9 

.8 

30. 

9.3 

.1 

.3 

.8 

.4 

1.7 

.9 

3i. 

9.1 

.4 

.7 

.3 

.1 

.6 

.9 

32. 

3.6 

.3 

1.2 

.3 

.4 

.3 

.9 

1.2 

.4 

34. 

5.1 

.5 

3.3 

.1 

.2 

.1 

.4 

.4 

35. 

4.9 

.6 

.2 

.1 

.2 

1.0 

1.3 

.6 

36. 

.1 

.2 

.4 

.2 

.2 

.3 

1.1 

.2 

.4 

37. 

4.6 

.9 

.7 

.2 

.4 

39- 

4.0 

.4 

.1 

40. 

3.8 

.1 

2.4 

.1 

3.8 

1.0 

41. 

3.6 

.2 

.2 

.1 

.4 

.1 

2.5 

.6 

.6 

42. 

3.4 

.8 

.1 

.2 

.1 

1.1 

.8 

.7 

43- 

2.9 

.1 

1.0 

.1 

.6 

.1 

.2 

2.4 

.8 

.4 

.5 

45- 

5.1 

.4 

.2 

.4 

.1 

.5 

.4 

.2 

.4 

48. 

3.9 

.1 

.4 

2.3 

.2 

.3 

.4 

.4 

52. 

4.7 

2.4 

.6 

.7 

.1 

.1 

.9 

.9 

.2 

54. 

2.8 

.5 

.6 

.1 

.1 

.3 

.9 

.4 

55- 

1.3 

.3 

.2 

2.5 

1.9 

1.6 

56. 

3.6 

.6 

.4 

.3 

.1 

.2 

.6 

2.0 

.4 

.6 

57- 

4.2 

.7 

.2 

.4 

.2 

.1 

.4 

.7 

.3 

.2 

29 


TABLE  V 

The  average  of  the  amounts  spent  for  each  item  for  two  years  expressed  as  per 
cents  of  the  average  total  expenditure  for  two  years.  Thirty  cities,  for  the  school 
years  1902-03  and  1903-04. 


■*» 

o 

u 

4> 
g 

u 

s'> 

$8 

I 

8, 

3 

1 

| 

i 

a 

ii 

11 

en  a 

-£C/3 

1 

'I 

a 

3 

55 

H<0 

w 

1 

H 

5- 

75.4 

2.2 

6.7 

73.2 

5.2 

7.1 

.9 

6. 

71.0 

4.4 

6.0 

66.7 

6.6 

6.0 

6.5 

8. 

72.5 

8.4 

6.0 

64.0 

6.0 

5.7 

3.6 

13. 

72.8 

15.4 

6.3 

59.4 

5.3 

6.6 

2.5 

14. 

68.4 

4.9 

7.4 

63.4 

5.6 

8.1 

5.9 

15. 

74.7 

8.9 

6.3 

65.8 

6.7 

6.2 

2.8 

16. 

75.5 

7.6 

6.6 

67.9 

5.6 

6.1 

3.5 

20. 

74.6 

2.6 

5.3 

72.2 

4.4 

8.6 

3.0 

27. 

68.1 

12.6 

7.6 

55.9 

7.0 

3.5 

3.6 

28. 

69.7 

3.9 

7.1 

65.8 

3.4 

29. 

65.7 

3.0 

7.7 

62.8 

6.9 

5.6 

2.1 

30. 

70.5 

2.6 

6.3 

67.8 

4.6 

8.3 

3i. 

64.0 

2.7 

6.6 

61.2 

11.2 

7.8 

32. 

65.4 

10.1 

6.4 

55.3 

2.8 

6.3 

7.1 

34- 

68.6 

4.4 

9.4 

64.2 

6.8 

3.3 

35. 

76.7 

3.8 

5.7 

72.9 

.3 

5.9 

3.8 

36. 

80.8 

17.2 

3.6 

62.6 

.7 

5.8 

1.2 

37. 

76.2 

17.2 

5.2 

59.2 

6.9 

3.4 

39. 

73.9 

11.9 

5.4 

62.1 

6.5 

4.1 

40. 

68.1 

11.1 

3.8 

57.0 

6.1 

7.3 

3.6 

41. 

70.0 

9.1 

4.5 

60.9 

5.6 

6.7 

1.8 

42. 

69.8 

15.7 

5.2 

54.1 

9.1 

5.1 

3.1 

43. 

72.0 

3.3 

6.4 

68.7 

3.3 

5.9 

2.7 

45- 

71.2 

4.3 

5.5 

66.9 

6.1 

3.9 

5.9 

48. 

68.5 

12.1 

5.7 

57.4 

6.3 

5.6 

2.7 

52. 

62.4 

6.1 

6.4 

56.2 

7.3 

3.6 

9.8 

54- 

65.4 

11.3 

5.4 

54.0 

13.2 

4.8 

3.5 

55. 

69.2 

4.8 

5.6 

64.4 

5.8 

5.1 

2.0 

56. 

71.2 

10.3 

8.3 

60.9 

3.8 

4.4 

4.4 

57. 

74.5 

9.7 

5.1 

64.8 

3.9 

4.2 

30 


TABLE  VI 

The  cost  per  pupil  expressed  in  dollars  and  cents.  The  number  used  as  a  divisor 
is  the  figure  half-way  between  the  average  daily  attendance  and  the  average  daily 
enrollment.     Forty-eight  cities,  for  the  school  year  1902-03. 


>. 

w 

a 

o„ 

'^2 

u 
0 

Number  of  Cit 
Total. 

bo 

! 

i 

•55 

1 

eg 

ii 

0 

i 

I 

u 

1 

0 

4* 
§ 

to 
M 

8 

n 

t 

to 

! 

& 

•a 
1 

\ 

0 

d 
1 

a  0 
0  s   . 

211 

0  rt 

n 

1 
m 

1 

I 

u 

I 

I.  34.18 

21.38 

.99 

.17 

2.26 

.14 

1.75 

1.13 

.30 

.03 

1.56 

.16 

2.  26.48 

16.69 

.88 

.07 

.15 

1.17 

.29 

.13 

4.39 

.12 

.06 

3.  27.09 

18.47 

1.08 

1.91 

1.66 

.27 

1.27 

4.  30.91 

19.73 

3.33 

.11 

2.21 

.08 

1.05 

.89 

.22 

1.48 

.07 

.12 

5.  32.30 

23.70 

.72 

.17 

2.13 

.25 

1.94 

.05 

.08 

1.97 

16 

6.  26.80 

19.50 

1.12 

1.41 

1.75 

.05 

.03 

1.10 

.07 

7.  21.19 

12.65 

1.68 

.10 

2.01 

.18 

53 

.79 

.18 

.78 

8.  29.80 

17.29 

4.04 

1.81 

.37 

1.48 

.44 

.05 

.10 

1.74 

.05 

.10 

9.  29.29 

19.50 

.82 

.32 

2.19 

.15 

1.96 

2.75 

.16 

io.  41.21 

30  40 

.70 

.28 

2.44 

.19 

.95 

1.34 

.10 

.17 

1.75 

.08 

.22 

ii.  27.90 

13.90 

3.23 

.31 

2.56 

.31 

1.88 

1.70 

.17 

12.  28.28 

18.12 

2.58 

2.14 

.07 

.82 

1.06 

1.99 

13.  28.53 

15.33 

4.96 

.18 

1.96 

.27 

.74 

.81 

.07 

1.88 

.05 

1.6 

14.  27.35 

17.02 

1.37 

1.86 

.07 

.85 

.68 

.07 

2.24 

.14 

15.  24.33 

17.20 

.52 

.12 

1.47 

.04 

.9r 

.97 

.06 

1.64 

.07 

16.  27.67 

18.65 

2.16 

1.77 

.38 

.80 

.92 

1.40 

17.  34.88 

21.90 

2.73 

.21 

2.45 

.14 

1.02 

1.07 

.01 

2.56 

.28 

18.  34.59 

24.39 

1.55 

2.35 

.08 

2.62 

2.23 

19.  27.78 

17.50 

.95 

.18 

1.90 

.04 

1.32 

.79 

2.00 

.11 

20.  22.53 

16.13 

.48 

1.16 

.15 

.54 

.35 

.04 

2.23 

.03 

.20 

28.  28.44 

18.55 

1.11 

.36 

2.05 

.18 

1.07 

2.14 

i.29 

29.  27.91 

17.20 

.81 

1.95 

.09 

1.91 

.32 

1.43 

.01 

.08 

31 


TABLE  VI  {Continued) 

The  cost  per  pupil  expressed  in  dollars  and  cents.  The  number  used  as  a  divisor 
is  the  figure  half-way  between  the  average  daily  attendance  and  the  average  daily 
enrollment.     Forty-eight  cities,  for  the  school  year  1902-03. 


.S 

1 

% 

u 

1 

1 

| 
1 

1 

to 

1 

I 

§ 

si 

i 

i 

1 

to 

C 
i—t 

*0  <D 

si 
Ii 

El 
II 

3:3 

of 

I 

1 

£  . 

§ 

3 

to 

i 

6 

to 

g  . 

O  to 
C% 
ll 
f| 

Jin 

■s-S 

13 

la 

to* 

s 

ft 
ft 
< 

e«  0 
Sn 

as 

X. 

1.80 

.01 

.24 

.70 

.15 

.10 

.02 

.10 

.56 

.14 

.45 

.02 

2. 

1.42 

.04 

.04 

.90 

.01 

.13 

.07 

3- 

1.05 

1.23 

.14 

4- 

1.03 

.05 

.02 

.05 

.03 

.01 

.09 

.10 

.26 

5- 

.32 

.10 

.34 

.01 

.10 

.16 

.08 

6. 

1.06 

.40 

.05 

.04 

.01 

.01 

.19 

7. 

1.40 

.02 

.44 

.18 

.03 

.09 

.01 

.06 

8. 

1.12 

.05 

.54 

.18 

.04 

.07 

.02 

.03 

.12 

.07 

.05 

9- 

.04 

.04 

.02 

1.34 

10. 

2.18 

.05 

.18 

.10 

.01 

ii. 

1.19 

.14 

.26 

.26 

.03 

.04 

.05 

1.89 

.07 

12. 

9.9 

.06 

.04 

.27 

.04 

.06 

13. 

.74 

.04 

.03 

.14 

.46 

.05 

.05 

.01 

.36 

.13 

.06 

.01 

14. 

1.93 

.03 

.02 

.44 

.09 

.05 

.16 

.20 

.10 

.05 

*5- 

.67 

.17 

.03 

.21 

.03 

.05 

.01 

.01 

.02 

.07 

.01 

x6. 

1.11 

.05 

.10 

17. 

1.39 

.03 

.35 

.07 

.12 

.01 

.03 

.08 

.12 

.24 

.07 

18. 

.95 

.05 

.24 

.04 

.08 

.02 

.02 

19. 

1.58 

.06 

.79 

.05 

.05 

.01 

.01 

.16 

.34 

20. 

.83 

.08 

.07 

.05 

.01 

.21 

28. 

.13 

2.98 

.12 
.06 

.34 

.13 

.10 

.05 

.83 

.22 

.3, 
.33 

5 

29. 

.17 

32 


TABLE  VI  {Continued) 

The  cost  per  pupil  expressed  in  dollars  and  cents.  The  number  used  as  a  divisor 
is  the  figure  half-way  between  the  average  daily  attendance  and  the  average  daily 
enrollment.     Forty-eight  cities,  for  the  school  year  1902-03. 


-4J 

d 

0) 

d 

eo 

I 

In 

berof  C 
Total. 

3 

1 

0 
•55 

u 

8. 

i 

CO 

u 

0 
-t-> 

"3 

0 

i 

0 

5 

0 
0 
m 
■*-> 

H 

4 

5 

3 

1 

2 

°CQ  3 

1 

1 

u 
B 

1 

I 

P 

£ 

1 

fi 

CO 

3 

I 

O  c3 

m 

4* 
§ 

3 

30.  35.41 

23.92 

.96 

.26 

2.24 

.32 

.61 

.98 

.24 

1.75 

.07 

31.  26.82 

15.20 

.76 

.27 

1.77 

.30 

1.50 

3.36 

.09 

32.  33.50 

18.52 

1.25 

.29 

1.88 

.17 

.36 

.63 

.13 

.63 

2.19 

.25 

33-  24.13 

16.31 

3.08 

.34 

1.48 

.09 

.17 

.04 

.03 

1.20 

.04 

34-  35.20 

22.65 

1.52 

.42 

2.82 

.55 

.02 

.32 

.21 

.14 

3.54 

.08 

35-  24.08 

17.55 

.48 

.17 

1.57 

.17 

.02 

.09 

.06 

1.36 

.06 

37-  18.55 

10.96 

3.13 

.37 

.98 

.09 

.38 

1.11 

38.  22.68 

14.65 

1.69 

.87 

.37 

.05 

.09 

.15 

.05 

1.25 

39-  30.87 

19.24 

3.42 

.30 

1.61 

.24 

.54 

.24 

2.03 

40.  33.61 

21.08 

1.36 

.43 

1.33 

.28 

.58 

1.40 

.11 

2.95 

.24 

41.  23.77 

15.41 

1.00 

.44 

1.09 

.02 

1.35 

.03 

.01 

1.44 

.11 

.21 

42.  28.23 

15.31 

4.39 

.32 

1.48 

.32 

1.42 

1.11 

.16 

1.58 

.32 

43-  25.14 

16.39 

.89 

.16 

1.67 

.20 

.47 

.43 

.17 

.03 

2.23 

.09 

.15 

44-  25.50 

16.22 

1.16 

.16 

1.54 

.22 

.30 

.03 

.39 

2.55 

.12 

.21 

45-  27.14 

18.20 

.61 

.05 

1.45 

.18 

1.48 

.33 

.08 

.05 

1.03 

.25 

46.  39.40 

24.23 

4.47 

.29 

1.81 

.20 

1.13 

.68 

.37 

.18 

1.55 

.05 

.13 

47-  18.33 

5.11 
12.28 

2.98 
2.06 

.66 
.23 

1.55 
1.26 

.16 

.28 

.61 

.90 

.51 

2.95 
1.29 

.11 
.05 

.04 

48.  21.09 

.29 

.05 

.04 

.11 

49.  20.93 

13.40 

2.54 

.14 

.85 

.28 

1.09 

.21 

.14 

.07 

1.15 

.04 

51.  29.83 

19.60 

4.14 

.30 

1.63 

.20 

.56 

.14 

.07 

.02 

1.67 

.03 

53-  29.61 

19.82 
35.07 

3.62 
5.64 

.21 

.67 

2.04 
2.92 

1.44 

.29 
.17 

2.61 

.83 
.56 

54-  52.75 

2.02 

2.40 

.42 

55.  19.61 

12.08 

.66 

.11 

1.04 

.22 

1.09 

1.09 

.11 

56.  27.12 

14.82 

4.42 

.22 

2.28 

.08 

.43 

50 

.32 

.46 

1.18 

.11 

57.  51.49 

33.36 

5.11 

.96 

2.43 

1.35 

2.24 

.11 

.11 

2.02 

.22 

58.  20.38 

12.83 

1.97 

.13 

1.11 

1.32 

.26 

.13 

.66 

.05 

.09 

33 


TABLE  VI  (Continued) 

The  cost  per  pupil  expressed  in  dollars  and  cents.  The  number  used  as  a  divisor 
is  the  figure  half-way  between  the  average  daily  attendance  and  the  average  daily 
enrollment.     Forty-eight  cities,  for  the  school  year  1902-03. 


>. 

•** 

o 

*o 

h 

| 

55 

£ 
I 

& 

1 

to 

w 

C 

6 

"0 
0 

§ 
H 

s 

6 
0 

§ 

*2» 

Sj 

tt-S2 
.St 

n 

fcC 

a 

in 

1  . 

2 
u 

g 

0 

-a 

3  . 

O  w 

is 

11 

Apparatus. 

Reference  and 
Library  Books. 

30. 

2.61 

.02 

.21 

.11 

.30 

.33 

.06    .40 

3i. 

1.72 

.17 

.10 

.07 

.14 

.14 

.04 

.97 

.34 

1.7 

32. 

3.56 

.13 

.18 

.27 

.27 

.10 

1.26 

.83 

21    .63 

33- 

1.13 

.07 

.06 

.06 

.06 

.02 

.02 

34- 

.51 

.19 

.18 

.51 

.43 

.43 

.07 

.17 

.60 

.23 

35- 

.67 

04 

.09 

.16 

.16 

.02 

.06 

.97 

.14 

.16    .21 

37. 

.43 

.04 

.11 

.11 

.61 

.32 

38. 

2.23 

.05 

.26 

.02 

.14 

.02 

.30 

.05 

.18     .28 

39- 

1.31 
1.17 

.04 

.06 
.49 

.56 

.04 

.43 

.17 

1.31 
.73 

40. 

.03 

.68 

41. 

.04 

.43 

.05 

.02 

.17 

.05 

.06 

.04 

.05 

1.22 

.14 

.35 

42. 

.79 

.32 

.02 

.08 

.02 

.05 

.32 

.16    .10 

43- 

.62 

.04 

.10 

.07 

.01 

.01 

.12 

.02 

.01 

.70 

.17 

.21     .16 

44- 

1.09 

.59 

.31 

.05 

.07 

.01 

.15 

.18     .10 

45. 

1.88 

.30 

.03 

.24 

.03 

.65 

.12 

.05    .13 

46. 

1.02 

1.42 

.10 

.07 

.21 

.04 

.18 

.04 

.55 

.22     .24 

47. 

2.42 

.12 

.33 

.21 

.06 

.37 

.03     .11 

48. 

.31 

.51 

.06 

.10 

.03 

.33 

.01 

.68 

.08 

.05     .06 

49- 

.28    . 

.05 

.12 

.04 

.02 

.01 

.06 

.19 

.19     .10 

5i. 

.56 

.02 

.27 

.02 

.06 

.01 

.04 

.03 

.23     .23 

53. 

.96 

.41 

54. 

2.21 

.24 

.42 

.19 

.24 

.03 

.19 

.64 

.24 

1.17     .19 

55. 

.55 

1.92 

.27 

.27     .22 

56. 

1.45 

.15 

.08 

.06 

.24 

.16 

.05     .10 

57. 

2.24 

.11 

.11 

.14 

.07 

.45 

.22     .22 

58. 

1.06 

.22 

.03 

.03 

.05 

.03     .40 

54 


TABLE  VII 

The  cost  per  pupil  expressed  in  dollars  and  cents.  The  average  number  of  pupils 
in  daily  attendance  is  used  as  the  divisor.  Fifty-seven  cities,  for  the  school  year 
1902-03. 


Number  of  City. 
Total. 

bo 

c 

3 
1 

a 

0 
•a 

u 

I 

0 

i 

0 
1 

in 

u 
0 

0 

1 

0 

i 

H 

CO 

O 
O 

n 

j 

e/i 

a. 

ij 

2 

'I 

c 
5 

?l| 

•Pmcn 

1 

0 

I.  35.64 

22.30 

1.03 

.18 

2.35 

.14 

1.83 

1.18 

.31 

.04 

1.63 

17 

2.  28.00 

17.60 

.93 

.07 

.16 

1.24 

.31 

.14 

4.70 

.13 

.07 

3.  28.06 

19.10 

1.12 

1.98 

1.72 

.28 

1.32 

4.  31.90 

20.35 

3.44 

.11 

2.27 

.08 

1.08 

.92 

.22 

1.53 

.07 

.12 

5-  33.27 

24.41 

.74 

.18 

2.19 

.26 

1.99 

.06 

.08 

2.03 

.16 

6.  27.65 

20.10 

1.15 

1.45 

1.81 

.05 

.03 

1.14 

.07 

7.  21.61 

12.91 

1.71 

.11 

2.05 

.18 

.54 

.81 

.18 

.80 

8.  31.16 

18.10 

4.23 

1.89 

.39 

1.55 

.46 

.05 

.10 

1.82 

.05 

.10 

9.  31.01 

20.63 
31.91 

.86 
.73 

.33 

.29 

2.32 
2.56 

.15 
.20 

2.08 

.18 

2.91 
1.84 

.11 

.17 

io.  43.23 

.99 

1.39 

.12 

.23 

ii.  29.01 

14.42 
18.75 
15.90 

3.35 
2.66 
5.14 

.32 
.19 

2.65 
2.21 
2.03 

.32 

.07 
.28 

1.94 

1.77 
2.05 
1.95 

.18 
.05 

12.  29.20 

.85 

.77 

1.09 

13.  29.56 

.83 

.07 

.16 

14.  28.75 

17.89 

1.44 

1.95 

.07 

.89 

.71 

.08 

2.50 

15.  25.35 

17.91 

.55 

.12 

1.53 

.04 

1.01 

1.01 

.07 

1.71 

.07 

16.  28.41 

19.17 

2.22 

1.82 

.39 

.82 

.94 

1.44 

.33 

17.  36.00 

22.60 

2.82 

.22 

2.53 

.14 

1.05 

1.11 

.01 

2.64 

.29 

18.  35.70 

25.17 
18.16 

1.60 
.98 

.19 

2.43 
1.97 

.08 
.04 

2.71 

2.30 

2.08 

19.  28.90 

1.37 

.82 

.11 

20.  23.16 

16.58 

.49 

1.19 

.15 

.55 

.36 

.04 

2.29 

.03 

.21 

21.  24.50 

16.90 

3.08 

.05 

1.44 

.05 

.38 

.09 

.05 

.94 

.05 

.04 

22.    8.94 

6.63 

.11 

.37 

.53 

.13 

.02 

.37 

.03 

23.  12.85 

3.69 

3.78 

.08 

1.92 

.08 

1.27 

.08 

24.  15.26 

9.87 

1.41 

.23 

.96 

.10 

.22 

.01 

.01 

1.03 

.07 

.14 

25.  31.00 

21.67 

2.45 

1.53 

.11 

.11 

.03 

.05 

2.04 

.04 

.25 

26.  32.67 

18.37 

5.47 

.19 

1.92 

.03 

.66 

.99 

.04 

.03 

1.45 

.05 

.18 

27.  26.96 

15.11 
19.77 

2.82 
1.19 

.39 

1.95 
2.19 

.20 

1.64 
1. 

.48 

1.25 

2.28 

.12 

28.  30.30 

14 

L.38 

29.  29.50 

18.21 

.86 

2.06 

.09 

2.01 

.33 

1.51 

.01 

.08 

35 


TABLE  VII  (Continued) 

The  cost  per  pupil  expressed  in  dollars  and  cents.  The  average  number  of  pupils 
in  daily  attendance  is  used  as  the  divisor.  Fifty-seven  cities  for  the  school  year 
1902-03. 


iber  of  City. 
Repairs. 

a 
2 

8 

*o 

2 

"o 

§ 

Is 

I 

1 

■ 

11 

co  tt 
II 

11 

II 

ft  « 

2 

B 

f 
1 

CO 

3    . 
0  tn 

81 

II 

II 

n 

Apparatus. 

ference  and 
rary  Books. 

1 

i 

fafa 

fa< 

00 
0 

t 

H 

«5 

i.  1.88 

.01 

.25 

.73 

.16 

.11 

.02 

.10 

.16 

.56 

.47   .02 

2.  1.50 

.05 

.05 

.83 

.01 

.14 

.07 

3.  1.09 

1.28 

.15 

4.  1.06 

.05 

.02 

.05 

04 

.01 

.09 

.11 

.27 

5.    .33 

.11 

.34 

.01 

.11 

.16     .08 

6.  1.09 

.41 

.05 

.04 

.01 

.01 

.19 

7.  1.43 

.02 

.45 

.19 

.03 

.11 

.01 

.06 

8.  1.17 

.05 

.56 

.19 

.04 

.08 

.03 

.03 

.13 

.08     .05 

9.    .05 

.05 

.03 

1.42 

10.  2.29 

.05 

.19 

.10 

.01 

ii.  1.24 

.14 

.26 

.26 

.04 

.04 

.01 

.05 

1.96 

.07 

12.  1.03 

.07 

.04 

.28 

.04 

.06 

13.      77 

.04 

.03 

.14 

.48 

.05 

.05 

.01 

.37 

.14 

.06     .01 

14.  2.02 

.03 

.03 

.46 

.10 

.05 

.17 

.21 

.10     .05 

15.    .69 

.17 

.03 

.22 

.03 

.06 

.01 

.01 

.02 

.07     .01 

16.  1.14 

.05 

.10 

17.  1.43 

.03 

.36 

.07 

.12 

.01 

.02 

.08 

.12 

.25     .07 

18.     .98 

.05 

.25 

.04 

.08 

.02 

.02 

19.  164 

.07 

.82 

.05 

.05 

.01 

.01 

.16 

.35 

20.    .85 

.09 

.07 

.05 

.01 

.22 

21.     .94 

.14 

.02 

.01 

.01 

.01 

.19 

.07 

22.     .59 

.01 

.02 

.01 

.06 

.08 

23.     .90 

.06 

.03 

.40 

.01 

.19 

.08     .26 

24.     .45 

.03 

.32 

.05 

.01 

.02 

.19 

.13 

25.  1.83 

.08 

.25 

.01 

.25 

.01 

.14 

.05     .11 

26.  1.12 

.19 

.10 

.03 

.44 

.03 

.10 

.02 

.01 

.17  1.05 

11:  ■" 

.54 

.10 

.03 

.08 

1.18 

.24 

.44     .27 

.14 

.13 

.05 

.89 

.23 

.35 

29. 

3.15 

.07 

.36 

.14 

.11 

.35     .18 

36 


TABLE  VII  (Continued) 


The  cost  per  pupil  expressed  in  dollars  and  cents.     The  average  number  of  pupils 

in  daily  attendance  is 

used  as  the  divisor. 

Fifty-seven  cities,  for  the  school  year 

1902-03. 

* 

.w" 

d 

V 

8. 

•^2 

tj 

Number  of  Cit 
Total. 

i 
I 

1 

4 

0 

1 
I 

8 

m 
0 

*> 

CO 

I 

10 

I 

1 

I 
i 

I 
1 

11  d 

W  KB, 

11 

I 

Light  and  Pow 
Water. 

30.  37.32 

25.25 

1.01 

.27 

2.36 

.34 

.64 

1.04 

.26 

1.85 

.07 

31.  27.90 

15.75 

.79 

.28 

1.84 

.32 

1.56 

3.49 

.09 

32.  34.49 

19.07 

1.29 

.30 

1.93 

.17 

.37 

.64 

.13 

.64 

2.25 

.25 

33.  24.85 

16.78 

3.18 

.35 

1.52 

.09 

.17 

.04 

.03 

1.24 

.04 

34.  35.96 

23.15 

1.56 

.44 

2.92 

.56 

.02 

.33 

.22 

.09 

3.61 

.08 

35-  24.52 

17.87 

.49 

.17 

1.60 

.18 

.02 

.10 

.06 

1.39 

.07 

31.94 

18.88 

5.54 

.25 

1.11 

.10 

.21 

.07 

.02 

1.66 

.22 

.18 

19.26 

11.40 

3.25 

.39 

1.01 

.09 

.40 

1.15 

23.56 

15.21 

1.75 

.91 

.40 

.05 

.10 

.15 

.05 

1.30 

32.01 

19.94 

3.55 

.31 

1.67 

.25 

.56 

.25 

2.11 

34.79 

21.90 

1.42 

.44 

1.38 

.29 

60 

1.45 

.11 

3.06 

.25 

24.65 

15.99 

1.03 

.46 

1.13 

.02 

L.40 

.04 

.01 

1.49 

.12 

.22 

28.50 

15.47 

4.43 

.32 

1.49 

.32 

1.43 

1.12 

.16 

1.59 

.32 

26.09 

17.00 

.92 

.17 

1.73 

.21 

.49 

.45 

.18 

.03 

2.31 

.10 

.15 

26.18 

16.69 

1.19 

.16 

1.58 

.23 

.31 

.03 

.40 

2.62 

.13 

.21 

28.53 

19.14 

.64 

.05 

1.53 

.19 

1.55 

.35 

.08 

.05 

1.08 

.26 

41.52 

25.53 

4.71 

.31 

1.91 

.21 

1.19 

.72 

.39 

.19 

1.63 

.05 

.14 

20.71 

5.78 

3.37 

.75 

1.75 

.18 

.69 

.57 

3.34 

.12 

.04 

22.75 

13.29 

2.23 

.25 

1.36 

.30 

.97 

.31 

.05 

.04 

1.39 

.05 

.12 

22.20 

14.20 

2.69 

.15 

.89 

.30 

1.15 

.22 

.15 

.08 

1.22 

.04 

32.05 

21.05 

4.45 

.32 

1.76 

.$1 

.59 

.15 

.15 

.02 

1.79 

.04 

26.39 

13.81 
20.49 
30.60 

1.75 
3.74 

5.87 

.19 
.21 
.69 

1.84 
2.11 
3.05 

.16 

.79 

.92 
1.49 

.16 

.12 
.29 

.18 

1.19 

30.61 

.85 

54.72 

2.11 

2.50 

.43 

2.72 

.58 

20.50 

12.61 

.69 

.11 

1.09 

.23 

1.14 

1.14 

.11 

28.01 

15.33 

4.56 

.22 

2.35 

.08 

.45 

.52 

.33 

.47 

1.22 

.11 

51.25 

33.20 

5.09 

.96 

2.42 

1.34 

2.23 

.11 

.11 

2.01 

.22 

21.51 

13.55 

2.08 

.14 

1.17 

L.39 

.28 

.14 

.69 

.06 

.10 

TABLE  VII  (Continued) 

The  cost  per  pupil  expressed  in  dollars  and  cents.  The  average  number  of  pupils 
in  daily  attendance  is  used  as  the  divisor.  Fifty-seven  cities,  for  the  school  year 
1902-03. 


Number  of  City. 
Repairs. 

3 

to 

§ 

1 

1 

*o 

§ 
SI 

O  3 

J 

I 

•0 

1| 

II 

I 

en 

I 

.  O 

i1 

i 
M 

OJ 
J 

8 

05 

3      . 
O   01 

US 
I! 

Is 

01 

| 

1 
a 
a 
< 

T3  o> 

30.  2.75 

.02 

.31 

.22 

.12 

.34 

.07 

.42 

31.  1.79 

.10 

.11 

.08 

.15 

.04 

1.01 

.35 

.18 

32.  3.67 

.13 

.18 

.06 

.27 

.10 

1.29 

.86 

.21 

.65 

33-  1.17 

.07 

.06 

.01 

.06 

.03 

.02 

34-     .52 

.19 

.18 

.52 

.44 

.07 

.17 

.61 

.23 

35-    .68 

.04 

.09 

.02 

.16 

.02 

.06 

.99 

.14 

.16 

.21 

36.    .72 

.10 

.33 

.06 

.02 

.02 

.08 

1.57 

.41 

.19 

.27 

37-     45 

.04 

.11 

.63 

.33 

38.  2.32 

.05 

.27 

.02 

.14 

.02 

.31 

.05 

.18 

.29 

39.  136 

.06 

.59 

.04 

1.36 

40.  1.21 

.05 

.51 

.03 

.70 

.45 

.18 

.76 

41.     .04 

.45 

.06 

.03 

.17 

.05 

.06 

.04 

.05 

1.27 

.15 

.36 

42.     .80 

.32 

.02 

.08 

.02 

.05 

.32 

.16 

.10 

43.      65 

.04 

.11 

.07 

.01 

.01 

.13 

.02 

.01 

.69 

.17 

.22 

.17 

44-  112 

.60 

.32 

.05 

.07 

.01 

.15 

.18 

.10 

45.  1.98 

.32 

.04 

.25 

.03 

.68 

.13 

.05 

.14 

46.  1.07 

1.49 

.11 

.08 

.22 

.04 

.19 

.04 

.58 

.23 

.25 

47.  2.03 

.14 

.37 

.23 

.07 

.42 

.04 

.13 

48.     .34 

.56 

.06 

.11 

.04 

.36 

.01 

.73 

.08 

.05 

.06 

49-      29 

.05 

.13 

.04 

.03 

.01 

.06 

.20 

.20 

.11 

51.     .59 

.02 

.29 

.02 

.06 

.01 

.05 

.03 

.25 

.25 

52.  3.95 

.31 

.18 

.21 

03 

.47 

.26 

.05 

53.  1.00 

.42 

54.  2.30 

.25 

.43 

.20 

.25 

.04 

.20 

.66 

.25 

1.21 

.20 

55.     .57 

2.01 

.29 

.29 

.23 

56.  1.50 

.16 

.08 

.07 

.25 

.17 

.06 

.11 

57.  2.23 

.11 

.11 

.13 

.07 

.45 

.22 

.22 

58.  1.12 

.24 

.03 

.03 

.06 

.03 

.42 

33 


TABLE  VIII 

The  cost  per  pupil  expressed  in  dollars  and  cents.  The  average  number  of  pupils 
in  daily  attendance  is  used  as  the  divisor.  Thirty  of  the  cities  which  reported  in 
1902-03  reporting  for  the  year  1903-04. 


0 

■M 

o 
u 

1 

"3 
& 

0 

T3     . 

11 

to 

§ 

0 

i 

55 

•> 
u 

1 

C/3 

1 
1 

2 

C 

t3 

a 

1 

I 

1 

85 

H 

5- 

34.08 

25.51 

24.77 

.74 

2.31 

1.29 

2.75 

.33 

6. 

24.26 

15.80 

14.66 

1.14 

1.61 

1.83 

1.91 

2.18 

8. 

32.36 

23.65 

22.58 

1.07 

1.86 

1.83 

1.78 

1.12 

13- 

34.21 

25.52 

20.91 

4.61 

1.94 

1.82 

2.25 

.82 

14. 

28.79 

19.96 

18.58 

1.38 

2.28 

1.63 

1.36 

15. 

24.65 

18.71 

14.88 

3.83 

1.57 

1.36 

1.44 

.69 

16. 

28.18 

21.32 

19.23 

2.09 

1.90 

1.51 

1.99 

.82 

20. 

23.06 

17.40 

16.71 

.69 

1.26 

1.21 

1.94 

.55 

27. 

26.25 

18.23 

14.57 

3.67 

2.07 

1.62 

.58 

.97 

28. 

29.38 
24.72 

20.63 
15.54 

19.50 
15.78 

1.13 
.76 

2.08 
2.08 

.87 
1.97 

3.94 

29. 

1.49 

1.26 

30. 

38.70 

26.99 

26.00 

.99 

2.42 

1.67 

3.57 

3i. 

30.92 

21.17 

20.37 

.80 

2.04 

3.12 

2.82 

32- 

28.00 

20.11 

15.52 

4.59 

2.04 

.78 

1.69 

1.02 

34- 

31.54 

21.62 

20.23 

1.39 

3.37 

1.13 

1.61 

35 

29.93 

23.40 

21.75 

1.65 

1.43 

.14 

1.90 

1.47 

36. 

31.70 

26.49 

21.20 

5.29 

1.16 

2.04 

.04 

37- 

20.71 

15.76 

12.15 

3.61 

1.08 

1.63 

.94 

39- 

28.78 

21.46 

17.80 

3.66 

1.59 

1.15 

40. 

31.14 

21.35 

15.72 

5.63 

1.14 

2.03 

1.17 

41. 

25.34 

17.94 

14.37 

3.57 

1.15 

1.40 

1.86 

.91 

42. 

29.09 

20.32 

15.72 

4.60 

1.50 

2.68 

1.38 

.98 

43- 

30.49 

22.94 

22.01 

.93 

1.92 

.92 

.94 

.89 

45- 

29.07 

21.22 

19.38 

1.84 

1.67 

1.61 

1.18 

1.47 

48. 

27.72 

19.66 

15.67 

3.99 

1.51 

1.97 

1.41 

1.07 

52. 

29.02 

19.08 

17.45 

1.63 

2.30 

2.11 

1.09 

1.37 

54- 

48.22 

30.98 

25.20 

5.78 

2.56 

8.70 

1.36 

55- 

17.91 

13.19 

12.07 

1.12 

1.06 

1.09 

.84 

.22 

56. 

30.93 

22.22 

20.85 

1.37 

2.58 

1.30 

1.36 

1.12 

57- 

52.48 

39.10 

34.07 

5.03 

2.94 

3.22 

2.07 

2.18 

39 


TABLE  IX 

The  average  cost  per  pupil  for  two  school  years,  1902-03  and  1903-04.  This 
table  is  derived  from  Tables  VII  and  VIII  which  are  based  on  the  average  number 
of  pupils  in  daily  attendance.     Thirty  cities. 


o 

*o 
u 

1 

*> 

T3     . 

c  d 

05  2 

■fc 

g 

IS 

1 
1 

i 
s 

*> 

u 

1 

10 
1 
•c 
8 
| 

0 

4» 

13 

§ 

Is 

1 

1 

55 

£co 

C/3 

<-> 

ff 

5- 

33.67 

25.33 

24.59 

.74 

2.25 

1.64 

2.39 

.33 

6. 

25.95 

18.52 

17.38 

1.14 

1.53 

1.72 

1.52 

1.63 

8. 

31.76 

22.99 

20.34 

2.65 

1.87 

1.92 

1.80 

1.14 

13. 

31.88 

23.28 

18.40 

4.88 

1.98 

1.71 

2.10 

.79 

14. 

28.77 

19.64 

18.23 

1.41 

2.11 

1.62 

2.48 

1.69 

15. 

25.00 

18.58 

16.39 

2.19 

1.55 

1.69 

1.57 

.69 

16. 

28.39 

21.35 

19.20 

2.15 

1.86 

1.63 

1.71 

.98 

20. 

23.11 

17.23 

16.64 

.59 

1.22 

1.06 

2.12 

.70 

27. 

26.10 

18.08 

14.84 

3.25 

2.01 

1.63 

.91 

.85 

28. 

29.84 

20.79 

19.63 

1.16 

2.13 

1.00 

29. 

27.11 

17.80 

16.99 

.81 

2.07 

1.99 

1.50 

1.26 

30. 

38.01 

26.62 

25.62 

1.00 

2.39 

1.76 

3.16 

3i. 

29.41 

18.85 

18.06 

.79 

1.94 

3.30 

2.30 

32. 

31.24 

20.23 

17.29 

2.94 

1.98 

.89 

1.97 

2.34 

34. 

33.75 

25.16 

21.69 

1.47 

3.14 

2.37 

1.06 

35. 

27.22 

20.88 

19.81 

1.07 

1.51 

1.14 

1.07 

36. 

31.82 

25.45 

20.04 

5.41 

1.13 

1.85 

.38 

37. 

19.98 

15.20 

11.77 

3.43 

1.04 

1.39 

.69 

39. 

30.39 

22.47 

18.87 

3.60 

1.63 

1.99 

1.25 

40. 

32.96 

22.33 

18.81 

3.52 

1.26 

2.03 

2.45 

1.19 

4i. 

24.99 

17.48 

15.18 

2.30 

1.14 

1.40 

1.67 

.47 

42. 

28.79 

17.09 

15.58 

4.51 

1.49 

2.61 

1.45 

.89 

43- 

28.29 

20.42 

19.50 

.92 

1.82 

.93 

1.62 

.77 

45. 

28.80 

20.50 

19.26 

1.24 

1.60 

1.75 

1.13 

1.72 

48. 

25.26 

17.59 

14.48 

3.11 

1.43 

1.62 

1.40 

.70 

52. 

27.70 

17.32 

15.63 

1.69 

2.07 

1.91 

1.00 

2.66 

54. 

51.47 

33.72 

27.90 

5.82 

2.86 

6.15 

2.32 

1.83 

55. 

19.20 

13.24 

12.34 

.90 

1.07 

1.11 

.99 

.39 

56. 

29.47 

21.05 

18.09 

2.96 

2.46 

1.13 

1.29 

1.31 

57. 

51.86 

38.69 

33.63 

5.06 

2.68 

3.39 

2.04 

2.20 

City  School  Expenditures  41 

EXPLANATION  OF  TABLES 

Table  I  gives  the  gross  amount  spent  for  maintenance  and  operation 
for  each  city,  and  the  amounts  spent  for  each  of  the  several  items  of  the 
budget.  The  amounts  spent  for  all  items  of  expenditure  should,  of  course, 
when  added,  give  the  gross  amount  spent,  which  is  scored  on  the  table 
as  "Total."  The  blanks  which  are  found  indicate  that  the  city  reported 
nothing  under  this  head,  or  that  this  item  is  included  under  one  head  with 
some  other,  in  which  case  they  are  underscored,  if  possible.  The  first 
line  of  Table  I  reads  as  follows:  City  number  one  spent  $76,252  for  main- 
tenance and  operation,  of  which  $47,712  were  spent  for  teaching,  $2200 
for  supervision,  $392  for  a  clerk,  $5032  for  janitors'  salaries,  $300  for 
truant  officers,  $3919  for  text-books,  etc.  The  data  given  in  Table  I  is 
for  the  school  year  1902-1903  for  fifty-eight  cities  of  from  10,000  to 
50,000  inhabitants,  located  in  Massachusetts,  Rhode  Island,  Connecticut, 
New  York,  and  New  Jersey. 

Table  II  gives  the  same  information  as  Table  I  for  thirty  of  the  same 
cities  for  the  school  year  1903-1904. 

Table  III  reduces  each  item  of  the  budget  to  per  cent,  of  the  total. 
The  first  line  reads:  In  city  number  one  62.6  per  cent,  is  spent  for  teach- 
ing, 2.9  per  cent,  for  supervision,  .5  per  cent,  for  clerk,  6.6  per  cent,  for 
janitors'  salaries,  etc.  If  the  sum  of  the  per  cents  for  all  of  the  items  is 
taken,  they  should  give  100  per  cent.  This  table  gives  information  for 
fifty-eight  cities  for  the  school  year  1902-1903,  as  noted  in  Table  I. 

Table  IV  gives  the  same  information  as  Table  III  for  thirty  of  the 
same  cities  for  the  school  year  19 03- 19 04. 

Table  V  is  derived  from  Tables  III  and  IV  by  finding  the  average  for 
two  years.  Thus,  for  city  number  five,  for  the  first  year,  teaching  and 
supervision  amounted  to  75.9  per  cent,  of  the  total  (see  Table  III,  line  5, 
first  and  second  items) ;  for  the  same  city  for  the  second  year  this  item 
was  74.9  per  cent,  of  the  total  (see  Table  IV,  first  line,  items  one  and 
two);  the  average  of  the  two,  75.4  per  cent.,  gives  the  first  figure  of 
Table  V.  In  like  manner,  janitors'  salaries,  for  the  first  and  second 
years  respectively,  for  city  number  five  amount  to  6.6  and  6.8  per  cent. 
This  gives  us  our  figure,  6.7  per  cent.,  for  janitors'  salaries  for  city  number 
five  in  Table  V  (see  Table  V,  first  line,  column  three). 

Table  VI  gives  the  cost  per  pupil  expressed  in  dollars  and  cents.  The 
number  used  as  a  divisor  here  is  the  figure  half-way  between  the  average 
number  of  pupils  in  daily  attendance  and  the  average  daily  enrolment, 
or  average  number  belonging,  as  it  is  sometimes  expressed.  As  stated 
elsewhere  in  the  text,  it  is  my  opinion  that  this  is  a  better  figure  than 
either  average  daily  attendance  or  average  daily  enrolment.  The  only 
reason  that  this  basis  is  not  used  throughout  the  study  is  because  the 
figures  for  average  daily  enrolment  could  not  be  secured  for  a  number 


42  City  School  Expenditures 

of  the  cities.  In  the  section  giving  coefficients  of  correlation  will  be 
found  a  number  of  coefficients  which  were  worked  out  on  this  basis  from 
this  table.  This  table  gives  data  for  forty-eight  cities  for  the  school 
year  1902-1903.  The  first  line  reads  as  follows:  City  number  one  spent 
$34.18  per  pupil  for  the  maintenance  and  operation  of  schools,  of  which 
$21.38  per  pupil  was  spent  for  teaching,  $0.99  per  pupil  for  supervision, 
$0.17  per  pupil  for  clerk,  $2.26  per  pupil  for  janitors'  salaries,  etc. 

Table  VII  gives  the  cost  per  pupil  expressed  in  dollars  and  cents. 
The  average  number  of  pupils  in  daily  attendance  is  used  as  the  divisor 
in  this  case.  The  first  line  reads  as  follows:  City  number  one  spent 
$35.64  per  pupil  for  the  maintenance  and  operation  of  schools,  of  which 
$22.30  per  pupil  was  spent  for  teaching,  $1.03  per  pupil  for  supervision, 
etc.  This  table  gives  data  for  fifty-seven  cities  for  the  school  year  1902- 
1903- 

Table  VIII  gives  the  same  information  as  Table  VII,  calculated  on 
the  same  basis  for  thirty  of  these  cities  for  the  school  year  1903-1904. 
This  table  is  read  the  same  as  Table  VII. 

Table  IX  gives  the  average  cost  per  pupil  for  thirty  cities  for  two 
years,  the  school  years  1902-1903  and  1903-1904,  for  the  principal  items 
of  expense.  This  table  is  derived  from  Tables  VII  and  VIII,  which  are 
based  on  the  average  number  of  pupils  in  daily  attendance.  The  first 
line  reads  as  follows:  In  city  number  five  the  average  for  two  years  of 
the  cost  per  pupil  for  maintenance  and  operation  of  schools  was  $33.67 
(1902-1903,  $33.27;  and  1903-1904,  $34.08);  for  teaching  and  super- 
vision the  average  was  $25.33;  for  teaching  alone,  $24.59,  e^c- 

Throughout  the  tables  a  number  written  across  the  space  between 
the  columns  indicates  that  this  number  applies  to  the  two  adjoining 
columns  taken  together,  and  similarly  an  underscore  running  across 
three  or  more  columns  indicates  that  the  number  applies  to  these  col- 
umns collectively. 

VARIABILITY 

In  the  tables  given  above,  which  compare  the  different  items 
of  the  school  budget  on  a  common  basis,  the  most  striking  thing 
to  be  noticed  is  the  variability  which  exists  among  the  cities. 
It  is  the  purpose  of  this  section  to  consider  somewhat  minutely 
the  problem  of  variability  in  connection  with  the  apportionment 
of  school  moneys  among  the  several  items  of  the  budget.  It 
may  not  be  out  of  place  here  to  call  attention  to  the  ambiguity 
if  not  the  positive  misrepresentation  of  facts  which  results  when, 
as  in  most  cases  where  such  data  have  been  collected,  the  average 
alone  is  given  to  represent  the  facts.     Of  course,  if  one  accepts 


City  School  Expenditures  43 

the  average  as  meaning  simply  that  the  sum  of  all  the  cases  is 
divided  by  their  number,  no  harm  is  done ;  but  if  one  takes  the 
average  as  indicative  of  the  general  tendency  or  as  a  measure 
applicable  to  the  majority  of  the  cases,  he  may  be  most  com- 
pletely deluded.  The  average  expenditure  per  pupil  for  cities 
Nos.  2  2,-  23,  54,  and  57  for  the  first  year  (see  Table  VII)  is  $31.94. 
They  spent  $8.94,  $12.85,  $54-72>  and  $51.25  respectively  per 
pupil.  The  average  in  this  case  does  not  correctly  represent 
the  group  nor  any  particular  city  within  the  group.  The  thing 
that  interests  us  in  the  measurement  of  any  trait  in  a  group  is 
the  range  or  limits  within  which  all  of  the  cases  lie,  and  the 
grouping  of  the  cases  within  these  limits. 

If  we  consider  the  facts  found  in  the  tables  already  given 
(Tables  I  to  IX),  we  find  that  cities  differ  greatly  not  only  in 
the  amount  per  pupil  which  they  spend  for  the  maintenance  and 
operation  of  their  schools,  but  also  that  even  where  cities  spend 
about  the  same  amount  per  child,  the  distribution  of  this  money 
among  the  several  items  of  the  budget  is  very  different.  Again, 
when  we  consider  simply  the  distribution  of  the  money  that  is 
spent,  regardless  of  the  amount,  as  is  done  in  the  table  which 
gives  the  per  cent,  which  each  item  is  of  the  total  cost  of  main- 
tenance and  operation,  we  find  that  there  is  the  greatest  vari- 
ability in  practice.  One  city  spends  44  %  of  the  cost  for 
maintenance  and  operation  (see  Table  III)  for  teaching  and 
supervision,  while  another  spends  82  %  for  the  same  purposes; 
the  janitors  receive  from  3  %  to  14  %  of  the  money  used  to  run 
the  schools;  supervision  costs  one  city  1  %  and  another  city 
17  %  of  the  whole  amount  spent;  salaries  for  teaching  vary 
from  27  %  to  73  %  of  the  budget.  It  would  seem  impossible 
that  the  money  is  properly  distributed  in  every  case  when  we 
consider  this  remarkable  variability  in  practice. 

The  undistributed  expenditure  reported  under  the  head 
"Miscellaneous"  needs  to  be  considered  in  any  argument  con- 
cerning the  variability  in  any  item  as  reported  by  several  cities. 
It  is  possible  that  a  very  large  part  of  the  amount  thus  reported 
properly  belongs  to  some  one  of  the  items  for  which  a  report 
has  been  made.  It  may  be  that  the  item  teaching,  supervision, 
fuel,  janitors'  salaries,  repairs,  or  some  other  would  be  greatly 
increased  if  the  report  had  properly  distributed  the  money.  It 
was  to  guard  against  any  such  obscurity  that  the  attempt  was 


44  City  School  Expenditures 

made  in  this  study  to  secure  a  complete  distribution  of  expen- 
ditures in  the  cities  from  which  information  was  received,  and, 
as  has  been  noted  above,  this  attempt  was  to  a  remarkable 
degree  successful.  Thirty  cities  out  of  fifty-eight  for  the  first 
year  report  nothing  under  this  head ;  sixteen  reported  less  than 
2  %,  ten  others  less  than  5  %,  and  the  two  remaining  reported 
5.14  %  and  6.75  %,  respectively,  as  unclassified  expenditures. 
For  the  second  year,  of  thirty  cities  reporting,  eighteen  report 
nothing  under  "Miscellaneous";  and  of  the  remaining  twelve, 
eight  report  1  %  or  less;  three,  2  %;  and  one,  3.76  %  under 
this  head.  It  is  quite  evident,  I  believe,  that  the  miscellaneous 
item  is  so  small,  even  where  it  occurs,  that  it  may  not  be  used 
as  an  explanation  of  the  variability  which  occurs  in  all  items 
of  expenditure ;  and  I  feel  that  it  is  safe  to  say  that  the  accurate 
distributions  of  the  amounts  reported  under  this  head  would 
not  alter  the  conclusions  reached  in  this  paper. 

It  might  be  argued  that  the  great  variability  is  due  to  the 
fact  that  the  cities  for  which  data  are  given  are  not  comparable, 
that  one  has  at  its  command  a  much  larger  amount  of  money  in 
proportion  to  the  number  of  children  to  be  educated  than  an- 
other, and  hence  the  variability.  It  is  true  that  rightly  or 
wrongly  some  of  these  cities  are  much  better  provided  with 
money  than  others,  but  that  does  not  seem  to  be  the  cause  of 
the  great  variability  in  the  apportionment  of  the  money  which 
they  do  have.  Take,  for  example,  cities  Nos.  3,  6,  19,  ax,  44, 
and  56.  From  the  information  given  in  Tables  I  and  III,  the 
following  table  may  be  built  up : 

No.  of  Total  No.  of  pupils  in  Cost 

City.  Expense.  daily  attendance.  per  pupil. 

3-  $52,708  1,876  $28.06 

6.  50,613  1,826  27.65 

19.  52,870  1,831  28.90 

ax.  52,178  2,127  24.50 

44.  48,410  1,850  26.18 

56.  50,192  1,794  28.01 


Per  cent,  spent  for  each  item: 


No.  of 
City. 

3- 

6. 
19. 
21. 

r44- 
56. 


Caching. 

Supervision. 

Janitors. 

Fuel. 

lext-books 
and  Supplies. 

Repairs. 

68.2 

4. 

7.1 

4.7 

6.1 

3.9 

72.9 

4.2 

5.3 

6.1 

6.6 

4. 

62.9 

3.4 

6.8 

7.2 

7.5 

5.7 

69.1 

12.6 

5.9 

3.8 

1.5 

3.8 

63.8 

4.6 

6.1 

10. 

1.2 

4.3 

54.6 

16.3 

8.4 

4.4 

3.4 

5.3 

City  School  Expenditures  45 

The  variation  found  cannot  be  due  in  these  cases  to  a  large 
undistributed  amount,  for  five  of  these  cities  distributed  their 
expenditures  in  the  special  reports  received  from  them  accord- 
ing to  the  classification  given,  without  finding  it  necessary  to 
report  anything  under  the  head  "Miscellaneous,"  and  the  other 
(No.  56)  reports  only  nine-tenths  of  1  %  under  this  head  (see 
Table  III). 

In  these  cities  the  amount  of  money  available  and  the  num- 
ber of  pupils  to  be  provided  for  do  not  differ  very  much.  We 
might  expect  that  if  there  were  any  principle  which  controlled 
the  apportionment  of  money,  or  if  the  money  were  apportioned 
in  the  best  way,  the  proportion  of  the  whole  cost  of  main- 
tenance and  operation  spent  for  any  of  the  principal  items 
would  be  approximately  the  same  in  these  cities.  By  glancing 
at  the  table,  however,  we  see  here  the  same  marked  variability 
which  is  found  when  the  whole  number  of  cities  is  considered. 
Not  that  there  is  quite  so  great  a  range,  which  would  be  very 
unusual  because  of  the  limited  number  of  cases,  but  that  the 
distribution  of  money  among  the  several  items  seems  not  to  be 
determined  by  any  common  principle. 

It  seems  strange  that  of  two  cities  (No.  6  and  No.  56)  which 
spend  respectively  $50,613  for  1826  pupils  and  $50,192  for  1794 
pupils,  one  should  spend  72.9  %  of  its  money  for  teaching 
while  the  other  spends  54.6  %  for  the  same  purpose.  Of  course, 
if  we  combine  the  items  of  teaching  and  supervision,  they  do  not 
differ  so  much  (77.1  %  and  70.9  %),  but  if  this  combination  of 
items  is  made  throughout  for  the  cities  of  this  table ,  we  have  a 
variation  in  the  proportion  spent  for  teaching  and  supervision 
of  from  66.3  %  to  81.7  %  of  the  total  (see  Nos.  19  and  21). 
For  the  other  items  in  these  cities  in  which  the  conditions  seem 
to  be  so  much  alike,  the  table  shows  the  same  variability.  Jani- 
tors' salaries  vary  from  5.3  %  to  8.4  %;  fuel,  from  3.8  %  to 
10  %  (in  cities  which  spend  respectively  $24.50  and  $26.18  per 
pupil);  text-books  and  supplies,  from  1.2  %  to  7.5  %;  and 
repairs  from  3.8  %  to  5.7  %  of  the  total. 

It  is,  indeed,  strange  if  44  %  of  the  cost  of  maintenance  and 
operation  can  in  one  city  provide  for  proper  teaching  and  super- 
vision (see  Table  III.),  that  in  another  city,  which  spends  more 
per  pupil,  it  requires  82  %  of  the  total  for  this  item.  It  would 
seem  that  owing  to  tradition,  to  poor  business  management,  or 


46  City  School  Expenditures 

to  some  other  more  invidious  cause,  the  money  spent  is  not 
always  spent  to  the  best  advantage.  It  seems  possible,  also, 
that  the  superintendent  whose  attention  is  called  to  the  wide 
variation  in  any  one  item  of  his  budget,  might  be  led  to  investi- 
gate the  matter,  in  order  to  determine  whether  there  is  any  good 
reason  for  such  deviation  from  the  ordinary  or  normal  condi- 
tion of  affairs. 

A  more  careful  study  of  the  variability  of  the  several  items 
of  the  budget  shows  that  in  many  cases  a  large  expenditure  for 
one  item  is  accompanied  by  a  small  expenditure  for  another. 
Again,  in  other  cases  large  expenditures  in  one  item  seem  to 
be  accompanied  by  large  expenditures  in  others  and  small  ex- 
penditures in  some  by  small  expenditures  in  others.  One  has 
but  to  examine  carefully  the  tables  to  have  suggested  the  pos- 
sibility of  significant  relationships.  In  another  section  I  shall 
consider  this  matter  more  fully  and  measure  a  number  of  these 
relationships  exactly  by  means  of  the  Pearson  Coefficient  of 
Correlation. 

There  are  three  ways  in  which  we  shall  express  the  variabil- 
ity in  order  to  get  as  clear  an  idea  as  is  possible  of  the  lack  of 
uniformity  and  in  order  to  suggest  the  problems  which  arise 
because  of  this  variability. 

From  the  tables  already  given  (see  Tables  I  to  IX),  it  is 
possible  for  us  to  make  out  frequency  tables  like  those  which 
follow.  In  these  tables  the  first  column  gives  the  amount  of 
money  spent,  or  the  per  cent,  of  the  total  which  the  item  is, 
and  the  second  column  gives  the  number  of  instances  where  this 
is  true.  They  give  all  the  facts  concerning  variability;  not 
only  the  range  or  limits  within  which  all  of  the  cases  lie,  but 
also  the  exact  placing  of  every  case. 

EXPLANATION  OF  TABLES 

Tables  X,  XI,  XII,  and  XIII  give  information  for  the  cities  reporting 
for  the  school  year  1 902-1 903. 

Table  X  reads  as  follows:  one  city  spends  27  %  for  teaching;  one, 
49  %;  one,  52  %;  one,  53  %;  two,  54  %,  etc. 

Table  XI  reads  as  follows :  two  cities  spend  1  %  for  supervision ;  eleven 
spend,  2  %;  seven,  3  %,  etc. 

Reading  the  first  lines  of  Tables  XII  and  XIII,  we  find  that  four 
cities  spent  3  %  of  the  budget  for  janitors'  salaries,  and  that  six  cities 
spent  3  %  for  fuel. 


TABLES  OF  FREQUENCY 

The  per  cent,  of  the  total  expenditure  for  maintenance  and  operation  which  is 
spent  for  teaching,  supervision,  janitors'  salaries,  and  fuel.  Fifty-eight  cities,  re- 
porting for  the  school  year  1902-03. 


Table  X 

Table  XI 

Table 

XII 

Table 

XIII 

Teaching. 

Supervision. 

Janitors 

'  Salaries. 

Fuel. 

Per  Cent. 

Frequency. 

Per  Cent. 

Frequency. 

Per  Cent. 

Frequency. 

Per  Cent. 

Frequency. 

27 

1 

1 

2 

3 

4 

3 

6 

28 

.     1 

2 

11 

4 

6 

4 

12 

29 

0 

3 

7 

5 

15 

5 

10 

30 

0 

4 

6 

6 

19 

6 

11 

31 

0 

5 

1 

7 

7 

7 

4 

32 

0 

6 

2 

8 

3 

8 

3 

33 

0 

7 

5 

9 

2 

9 

3 

34 

0 

8 

0 

10 

0 

10 

2 

35 

0 

9 

5 

11 

0 

11 

0 

36 

0 

10 

3 

12 

0 

12 

1 

37 

0 

11 

4 

13 

0 

13 

0 

38 

0 

12 

3 

14 

1 

14 

0 

39 

0 

13 

2 

15 

0 

40 

0 

14 

0 

16 

2 

41 

0 

15 

1 

42 

0 

16 

4 

43 

0 

17 

2 

44 

0 

45 

0 

46 

0 

47 

0 

48 

0 

49 

1 

50 

0 

51 

0 

52 

1 

53 

1 

54 

2 

55 

2 

56 

3 

57 

0 

58 

3 

59 

2 

60 

0 

61 

3 

62 

6 

63 

6 

64 

6 

65 

3 

66 

2 

67 

3 

68 

2 

69 

2 

70 

1 

71 

2 

72 

1 

73 

4 

47 


TABLES  OF  FREQUENCY 

The  per  cent,  of  the  total  expenditure  for  maintenance  and  operation  which  is 
spent  for  teaching,  supervision,  janitors'  salaries,  and  fuel.  Average  for  two  years, 
thirty  cities  reporting  for  the  school  years  1902-03  and  1903-04. 


Table 

XIV 

Table 

XV 

Table 

XVI 

Table 

XVII 

Teaching. 

Supervision. 

Janitors 

Salaries. 

Fuel 

Per  Cent. 

Frequency. 

Per  Cent.  Frequency. 

Per  Cent. 

Frequency 

Per  Cent.  Frequency. 

54 

3 

2 

4 

3 

2 

3 

4 

55 

2 

3 

4 

4 

1 

4 

3 

56 

1 

4 

5 

5 

10 

5 

8 

57 

2 

5 

0 

6 

11 

6 

9 

58 

0 

6 

1 

7 

4 

7 

2 

59 

2 

7 

1 

8 

1 

8 

2 

60 

2 

8 

2 

9 

1 

9 

0 

61 

1 

9 

2 

10 

0 

62 

3 

10 

2 

11 

1 

63 

1 

11 

3 

64 

4 

12 

2 

. 

65 

2 

13 

0 

66 

2 

14 

0 

67 

2 

15 

2 

68 

1 

16 

0 

69 

0 

17 

2 

(  .   •: 

70 

0 

71 

0 

72 

2 

73 

1 

3 

48 


TABLES  OF  FREQUENCY 

Cost  per  pupil  expressed  in  dollars,  the  average  daily  attendance  being  used  as 
the  basis  of  calculation.     Fifty-eight  cities,  reporting  for  the  school  year  1902-03. 


Table  XVIII 

Table  XIX 

Table  XX 

Table  XXI 

Table 

XXII 

Total  Cost  per  Pupil. 

Teaching  and 

Janitoi 

rs'  Salaries. 

Fuel. 

Text-Books  and 

Supervision. 

Supplies. 

Dollars. 

Frequency. 

Dollars.  Frequency. 

Dollars. 

Frequency. 

Dollars. 

Frequency. 

Dollars.  Frequency. 

8 

1 

6 

1 

.4 

1 

.4 

1 

.2 

2 

9 

0 

7 

1 

.5 

0 

.5 

0 

.3 

1 

10 

0 

8 

0 

.6 

0 

.6 

0 

.4 

1 

11 

0 

9 

1 

.7 

0 

.7 

1 

.5 

0 

12 

1 

10 

0 

.8 

0 

.8 

1 

.6 

0 

13 

0 

11 

1 

.9 

2 

.9 

1 

.7 

1 

14 

0 

12 

0 

1.0 

3 

1.0 

2 

.8 

0 

15 

1 

13 

1 

1.1 

4 

1.1 

3 

.9 

2 

16 

0 

14 

2 

1.2 

0 

1.2 

5 

1.0 

2 

17 

0 

15 

3 

1.3 

2 

1.3 

4 

1.1 

2 

18 

0 

16 

3 

1.4 

3 

1.4 

3 

1.2 

1 

19 

1 

17 

6 

1.5 

5 

1.5 

2 

1.3 

3 

20 

2 

18 

3 

1.6 

2 

1.6 

3 

1.4 

1 

21 

2 

19 

8 

1.7 

3 

1.7 

3 

1.5 

2 

22 

2 

20 

3 

1.8 

4 

1.8 

3 

1.6 

4 

23 

2 

21 

5 

1.9 

8 

1.9 

1 

1.7 

3 

24 

4 

22 

1 

2.0 

3 

2.0 

5 

1.8 

1 

25 

1 

23 

5 

2.1 

3 

2.1 

0 

1.9 

3 

26 

4 

24 

4 

2.2 

2 

2.2 

3 

2.0 

5 

27 

2 

25 

3 

2.3 

4 

2.3 

2 

2.1 

2 

28 

8 

26 

2 

2.4 

2 

2.4 

0 

2.2 

0 

29 

4 

27 

0 

2.5 

2 

2.5 

0 

2.3 

1 

30 

2 

28 

0 

2.6 

1 

2.6 

2 

2.4 

0 

31 

5 

29 

0 

2.7 

0 

2.7 

1 

2.5 

1 

32 

3 

30 

1 

2.8 

0 

2.8 

0 

2.6 

0 

33 

1 

31 

0 

2.9 

1 

2.9 

1 

2.7 

0 

34 

2 

32 

1 

3.0 

1 

3.0 

0 

2.8 

0 

35 

3 

33 

0 

3.1 

0 

2.9 

0 

36 

1 

34 

0 

3.2 

0 

3.0 

1 

37 

1 

35 

0 

3.3 

1 

3.1 

0 

38 

0 

36 

1 

3.4 

1 

3.2 

0 

39 

0 

37 

0 

3.5 

0 

3.3 

0 

40 

0 

38 

1 

3.6 

1 

3.4 

0 

41 

1 

3.7 

0 

3.5 

1 

42 

0 

3.8 

0 

3.6 

0 

43 

1 

3.9 

0 

3.7 

0 

44 

0 

4.0 

0 

3.8 

0 

45 

0 

4.1 

0 

3.9 

0 

46 

0 

4.2 

0 

4.0 

0 

47 

0 

4.3 

0 

4.1 

0 

48 

0 

4.4 

0 

4.2 

0 

49 

0 

4.5 

0 

4.3 

0 

50 

0 

4.6 

0 

4.4 

0 

51 

1 

4.7 

I 

4.5 

0 

52 

0 

4.6 

1 

53 

0 

54 

1 

49 


TABLES  OF  FREQUENCY 

Cost  per  pupil  expressed  in  dollars,  average  for  two  years,  the  average  daily  at- 
tendance being  used  as  the  basis  of  calculation.  Thirty  cities,  reporting  for  the 
school  years  1902-03  and  1903-04. 


Table  XXIII 

Table 

XXIV 

Table 

XXV 

Table  XXVI 

Table  XXVII 

Total  Cost  per 

Teaching  and 

Janitors' 

Salaries. 

Fuel. 

Text-Books  and 

Pupil. 

Supervision. 

Supplies. 

Dollars 

.  Frequency. 

Dollars. 

Frequency. 

Dollars.  Frequency. 

Dollars, 

,  Frequency. 

Dollars. 

Frequency. 

19 

2 

20 

0 

13 

1 

1.0 

2 

.9 

2 

.8 

1 

21 

0 

14 

0 

1.1 ' 

2 

1.0 

1 

.9 

1 

22 

0 

15 

1 

1.2 

2 

1.1 

1 

1.0 

2 

23 

1 

16 

0 

1.3 

0 

1.2 

1 

1.1 

2 

24 

1 

17 

6 

1.4 

2 

1.3 

1 

1.2 

0 

25 

3 

18 

4 

1.5 

3 

1.4 

2 

1.3 

0 

26 

1 

19 

1 

1.6 

2 

1.5 

3 

1.4 

1 

27 

3 

20 

5 

1.7 

0 

1.6 

3 

1.5 

0 

28 

5 

21 

2 

1.8 

3 

1.7 

2 

1.6 

6 

29 

3 

22 

3 

1.9 

3 

1.8 

2 

1.7 

3 

30 

1 

23 

1 

2.0 

3 

1.9 

2 

1.8 

0 

31 

4 

24 

0 

2.1 

2 

2.0 

1 

1.9 

3 

32 

1 

25 

3 

2.2 

1 

2.1 

2 

2.0 

1 

33 

2 

26 

1 

2.3 

1 

2.2 

0 

2.1 

0 

34 

0 

27 

0 

2.4 

1 

2.3 

3 

2.2 

0 

35 

0 

28 

0 

2.5 

0 

2.4 

2 

2.3 

0 

36 

0 

29 

0 

2.6 

1 

2.5 

0 

2.4 

0 

37 

0 

30 

0 

2.7 

0 

2.6 

0 

2.5 

0 

38 

1 

31 

0 

2.8 

1 

2.7 

0 

2.6 

1 

39 

0 

32 

0 

2.9 

0 

2.8 

0 

2.7 

0 

40 

0 

33 

1 

3.0 

0 

2.9 

0 

2.8 

0 

41 

0 

34 

0 

3.1 

1    , 

3.0 

0 

2.9 

0 

42 

0 

35 

0 

3.1 

0 

3.0 

0 

43 

0 

36 

0 

3.2 

0 

3.1 

0 

44 

0 

37 

0 

3.3 

1 

3.2 

0 

45 

0 

38 

1 

3.3 

1 

46 

0 

3.4 

0 

47 

0 

3.5 

0 

48 

0 

3.6 

0 

49 

0 

3.7 

0 

50 

0 

3.8 

0 

51 

2 

3.9 
4.0 
4.1 
4.2 
4.3 
4.4 
4.5 
4.6 
4.7 
4.8 
4.9 
5.0 
5.1 
5.2 
5.3 
5.4 
5.5 
5.6 
5.7 
5.8 
5.9 
6.0 
6.1 

0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 

1 

KO 


City  School  Expenditures  51 

Tables  XIV  to  XVII,  inclusive,  are  frequency  tables  based  upon  the 
average  of  the  first  and  second  years'  figures  from  thirty  cities.  It  will 
be  noticed  that  the  range  is  somewhat  less,  due  largely  to  the  fact  that 
there  are  fewer  cases.  These  tables  are  read  precisely  as  Tables  X  to 
XIII,  illustrated  above. 

The  tables  for  the  first  year's  figures  alone  are,  of  course, 
less  reliable  than  those  which  give  the  average  for  two  years,, 
so  far  as  any  one  city  is  concerned.  However,  the  greater  vari- 
ability found  in  these  figures  for  the  first  year  which  does  not 
appear  when  the  average  for  the  two  years  is  taken  is  due  largely 
to  the  fact  that  many  of  the  cities  which  give  the  extreme  varia- 
tion have  not  yet  reported  for  two  years.  In  Table  No.  X,  for 
example,  the  cities  reporting  27%,  28%,  49%,  and  52  %, 
respectively,  for  teaching,  are  cities  Nos.  47,  23,  11,  and  52, 
none  of  which  reported  for  the  second  year  (see  Tables  III  and 
IV).  The  variability  for  the  first  year's  figures  is,  simply  be- 
cause there  are  more  cases,  more  nearly  a  correct  representation 
of  the  facts  of  variability,  we  believe,  than  the  average  of  the 
two  years  where  many  of  the  extreme  cases  are  not  found.  It 
is  remarkable  that  so  small  a  proportion  as  27  %  should  be 
devoted  to  teaching  in  one  case,  when  other  cities  use  73  %  of 
their  funds  for  this  purpose, — that  some  cities  should  give  2.7 
times  as  great  a  proportion  for  teaching  as  others. 

The  variation  in  the  proportion  which  is  spent  for  super- 
vision is  not  less  remarkable.  Here  the  cities  seem  to  divide 
themselves  into  groups — those  which  spend  a  comparatively 
large  proportion  of  their  money  for  supervision,  and  those  in 
which  this  item  is  allowed  a  smaller  share  of  the  money.  One 
feels  that  supervision  which  costs  1 7  %  of  the  money  available 
for  schools  should  produce  remarkable  results  in  the  way  of 
saving  time  and  energy  for  teachers  and  pupils,  if  it  is  to  be 
justified  when  compared  with  other  cities  in  which  2  %  of  the 
budget  seems  to  secure  satisfactory  supervision. 

The  range  for  janitors'  salaries  (Table  XII)  may  indicate  a 
real  difference  in  the  care  of  school  buildings,  or,  in  rare  in- 
stances, perhaps  some  connection  between  ward  politics  and  the 
janitors'  position.  Leaving  out  the  most  extreme  case,  it  seems 
rather  remarkable  that  in  some  instances  one  dollar  out  of  every 
eleven  available  for  the  maintenance  and  operation  of  the 
schools  should  be  spent  for  the  care  of  buildings. 


52  City  School  Expenditures 

That  fuel  should  be  allowed  in  some  cities  three  times  as 
great  a  proportion  of  the  money  spent  as  in  others  (see  Table 
XIII)  would  not  seem  strange  if  our  cities  were  found  in  sec- 
tions of  the  country  with  very  different  climatic  conditions; 
but  that  four  or  even  five  times  as  much  should  be  necessary 
under  conditions  which  are  not  greatly  different  seems  prepos- 
terous. 

Tables  XIV  to  XVII,  which  are  based  on  the  average  for 
two  years,  give  the  most  accurate  information  we  have  for  the 
thirty  cities  which  reported  two  years.  The  limits  within  which 
the  cases  lie  are,  as  has  already  been  noted,  somewhat  smaller 
than  in  the  case  of  the  first  year's  figures  considered  alone. 
This  is  due  largely  to  the  fact  that  we  have  a  smaller  number 
of  cases.  The  variability  is,  nevertheless,  sufficiently  striking 
with  a  range  of  from  54  %  to  73  %  for  teaching,  from  2  %  to 
17  %  for  supervision,  from  3  %  to  9  %  for  janitors'  salaries,  and 
from  3  %  to  1 1  %  for  fuel. 

Tables  XVIII  to  XXII  give  the  variability  for  the  cost  per 
pupil  for  some  of  the  principal  items  of  the  budget.  The  cost 
per  pupil  as  given  here  is  based  on  the  average  daily  attendance 
(see  Table  VII). 

Table  XVIII  reads  as  follows:  one  city  spent  for  main- 
tenance and  operation  per  pupil  in  attendance,  $8.00;  one  city, 
$12.00;  one  city,  $15.00;  one  city,  $19.00;  two  cities,  $20.00; 
two  cities,  $21.00,  etc. 

Tables  XXIII  to  XXVII  give  the  variability  for  some  of  the 
principal  items  of  the  budget  on  the  cost  per  pupil  basis,  the 
average  amount  spent  per  pupil  for  two  years  being  used  (see 
Table  IX).  Table  XXIII,  for  instance,  reads  as  follows:  the 
average  amount  for  two  years  spent  for  maintenance  and  opera- 
tion per  pupil  in  attendance  for  two  cities  was  $29.00;  one  city, 
$23.00;  one  city,  $24.00;  three  cities,  $25.00,  etc. 

In  the  tables  given  above,  we  have  an  expression  of  the 
variability  in  terms  of  the  amount  of  money  spent.  We  some- 
times think  of  the  cities  in  the  region  covered  by  this  study  as 
spending  a  very  large  amount  for  public  education.  The  average 
inhabitant,  if  not  the  school  officers  themselves,  of  any  of  these 
cities  will  probably  say  that  their  school  system  is  quite  as  good 
as  any  other,  or  at  least  as  good  as  the  average.  As  a  matter  of 
fact,  we  find  a  great  variability  in  the  total  amount  per  pupil 


City  School  Expenditures 

spent,  as  well  as  in  the  amount  spent  for  various  items.  No  one 
believes  that  the  city  which  spends  $54.00  per  pupil  furnishes 
an  education  six  and  three-quarter  times  as  good  as  the  city 
which  spends  only  $8.00  per  pupil.  On  the  other  hand,  it 
hardly  seems  possible  that  the  opportunity  for  education  in  the 
eight-dollar  city  can  be  equal  to  that  found  in  the  fifty -four- 
dollar  city.  Teaching  and  supervision  which  cost  $6.00  per 
child  are  hardly  likely  to  be  as  good  as  those  which  cost  three, 
four,  five,  or  even  six  times  as  much.  No  argument  based  upon 
the  difference  in  the  cost  of  living  could  account  for  so  great  a 
difference  in  the  cost  of  instruction.  Either  the  teachers  re- 
ceive a  very  much  smaller  salary  in  the  cities  which  pay  a  rela- 
tively small  amount  per  pupil,  or  they  have  much  larger  classes 
to  instruct,  or  both  conditions  taken  together  explain  the 
variability. 

One  may  infer  that  the  number  of  children  determines  the 
number  of  seatings  which  must  be  furnished,  if  not  the  number 
and  size  of  buildings ;  and  yet  janitors'  salaries  may  cost  from 
40  cents  to  $3.00  per  pupil,  and  fuel  from  40  cents  to  $4.70  per 
pupil. 

If  we  neglect  the  cases  where  a  very  little  is  spent  for  text- 
books and  supplies, — the  cases  where  they  are  not  furnished 
free  to  pupils, — we  still  find  that  some  cities  spend  three  or  four 
times  as  much  per  pupil  as  others  for  these  articles.  It  seems 
rather  remarkable  that  the  real  value  of  books  and  supplies  fur- 
nished to  pupils  should  vary  so  much;  and  even  if  this  were 
the  case,  one  might  question  whether  the  money  is  spent  to 
best  advantage  in  those  cities  which  spend  the  larger  amounts. 
Might  not  a  part  of  this  money  have  been  spent  to  greater  ad- 
vantage in  some  other  way? 

The  limits  within  which  all  of  the  cases  lie  are  significant, 
but  are  not  so  true  a  measure  of  the  variability  of  the  group  as 
are  the  limits  within  which  the  middle  50  %  of  the  cases  lie. 
A  single  exceptional  case  may  double  the  range  within  which 
all  of  the  cases  lie,  but  manifestly  this  does  not  double  the 
variability  of  the  group.  This  figure,  which  we  call  2  Q,  is  found 
by  counting  in  from  both  the  upper  and  lower  limits  until  25  % 
of  the  cases  have  been  covered,  and  then  finding  the  range 
within  which  the  remaining  50  %  of  the  cases  lie.  For  instance, 
in  Table  X,  in  which  there  are  58  cases,  we  count  off  from  the 


54  'City  School  Expenditures 

lower  limit  fifteen  cases  (25  %  «-  14^),  which  brings  us  to  the 
group  of  three  cities  which  spend  58  %  of  their  money  for 
teaching;  in  like  manner,  counting  from  the  other  extreme, 
25  %  of  the  cases  are  found  to  spend  more  than  67  %  of  their 
money  for  teaching.  The  limits  within  which  the  middle  50  % 
of  the  cases  lie  are,  then,  58  and  67,  and  2  Q  equals  (67  —  58  =9) 
nine.  After  we  have  found  the  2  Q,  the  relation  which  it  bears 
to  the  median  gives  us  a  still  better  idea  of  the  variability  of 
the  group.  If  it  is  desired  to  compare  the  variability  of  the 
group  in  several  traits,  the  relation  of  the  2  Q  to  the  square 
root  of  the  median  is  more  exact  than  either  of  the  figures  before 
suggested  because  this  measure  will  be  less  affected  by  errors 
due  to  inaccuracy  of  measurements,  or  to  the  small  number  of 
measurements  made.  In  the  table  below,  2  Q,  the  per  cent, 
which  2  Q  is  of  the  median,  and  the  per  cent,  which  2  Q  is  of 
the  square  root  of  the  median  are  given.  This  table  is  derived 
from  the  frequency  tables,  Tables  X  to  XXVII  inclusive. 


—  o 


3=3  -SB 

?  IS  III 


<N 


a  5  c 

cub 


Per  cent,  of  total  spent  for  each  item.    First 

year's  figures.     See  Tables  X  to  XIII 

inclusive : 

Teaching 9  14  113 

Supervision 8  105  290 

Janitors'  Salaries 1  16  40 

Fuel 3  50  123 

Per  cent,  of   total   spent   for   each   item. 

Average    of    two    years'     figures.     See 

Tables  XIV  to  XVII  inclusive: 

Teaching 9  14  112 

Supervision. 8  100  283 

Janitors'  Salaries 4  65  166 

Fuel 1  16  42 

Cost  per  pupil.     First  year's  figures.     See 
Tables  XVIII  to  XXII  inclusive: 

Total  cost  per  pupil 7  25  132 

Teaching  and  Supervision 6  33  136 

Janitors'  Salaries 7         37  50 

£uelW, 8         50  61 

Text- Books  and  Supplies 9         53  69 


City  School  Expenditures  55 


jn 

01<«-l 
•M   O 

O 

Vi  g 

m 

3s  • 

8 

111 

1^S 

SI 

fe 

Sjo* 

£ 

s 

17 

93 

25 

111 

37 

50 

41 

53 

50 

61 

Oost  per  pupil.  Average  of  two  years' 
figures.  See  Tables  XXIII  to  XXVII 
inclusive : 

Total  cost  per  pupil 5 

Teaching  and  Supervision 5 

Janitors'  Salaries .7 

Fuel 7 

Text-Books  and  Supplies .8 

In  the  diagrams  which  follow,  the  variability  is  expressed 
graphically.  The  heavy  line  gives  the  distribution  based  on  the 
average  of  the  first  and  second  years'  figures,  while  the  dotted 
line  gives  the  distribution  for  the  first  year's  figures  from  those 
cities  which  reported  both  years.  Along  the  horizontal  axis  is 
indicated  the  per  cent,  of  the  total  (or  cost  per  pupil),  while  the 
vertical  distance  indicates  the  number  of  cases. 

This  method  of  indicating  variability  enables  one  who  is 
accustomed  to  this  mode  of  representation  to  take  in  at  a  glance 
at  least  the  more  striking  features.  It  will  be  noticed  that  in 
the  main  the  distribution  for  the  first  year's  figures,  taken  alone 
(the  dotted  line),  conforms  to  that  for  the  average  of  the  two 
years.  This  is  significant  in  that  it  shows  that  the  conclusions 
which  may  be  drawn  from  the  one  year's  figures  are  fairly 
reliable,  and  that  we  were  justified  in  our  treatment  of  variabil- 
ity above  to  make  use  of  the  first  year's  figures  with  the  greater 
number  of  cases. 


56 


City  School  Expenditures 


FIG.    L 


:     • 

I  Fl 

FIG.    8. 

i 
i 

-rlrtiF 

>       1 

• 

Z      4 


ii      ^  - 

70  78       80 


St     CO 


FIO.4 


3       4  0  $ 

Surfaces  of  Frequency  on  the  Per  Cent,  of  Total  Basis. 

Fig.  i. — Teaching. 

Fig  'a.— Supervision. 

Fig.  3- — Teaching  and  Supervision. 

Fig.  4. — Janitors*  Salaries 


City  School  Expenditures 


57 


FIO.   & 


: l 


1        3        S 


11        13 


fig.   a 


1 TH 


3       4 


12 


12        3  7  10  14 

Surfaces  op  Frequency  on  the  Per  Cent,  of  Total  Basis 

Fig.  5. — Text-Books  and  Supplies. 
Fig.  6. —Fuel. 
Fig.  7. — Repairs. 


58 


City  School  Expenditures 


£T 


F  I  G.  8. 


13      15 


27 


33 


FIG.  a 


11       13       15 


19 


29 


33 


1 
1 
I 

F  I  G.  10. 
J,                1 1 

,"—**■» 

_J 

i      1      ; 

-] 

1 

i 

50      1.        1.5 


5.5 


FIG.  1L 


•»       11       13  1.7  2.5  3J 

Surfaces  of  Frequency  on  the  Cost  per  Pupil  Basis 

Fig.    8. — Teaching  and  Supervision. 

Fig.    9. — Teaching. 

Fig.  10. — Supervision. 

Fig.  ii. — Janitors'  Salaries. 

Fig.  12. — Text-Books  and  Supplies. 


City  School  Expenditures 


59 


Fiaia 


50     .75       t  2.  3.  4. 

Surfaces  of  Frequency  on  the  Cost  per  Pupil  Basis 

Fig.  13. — Fuel. 
Fig.  14. — Repairs. 

Still  another  method  of  indicating  variability  is  by  means  of 
giving  the  deviation  for  each  of  the  items  from  some  central 
figure  which  may  be  agreed  upon. 

In  the  tables  which  follow,  the  deviations  are  calculated 
from  the  median.  The  median,  which  is  simply  the  point  above 
and  below  which  fifty  per  cent,  of  the  cases  lie,  is,  we  believe, 
the  best  figure  to  use  in  this  case  as  representing  a  central  ten- 
dency. It  is  unambiguous  and  is  not  so  much  influenced  by  ex- 
treme cases  nor  by  error  as  the  average  would  be. 

EXPLANATION  OF  TABLES 


Table  XXVIII  gives  the  medians  and  deviations  from  them  for  the 
cost  per  pupil  based  on  the  average  number  of  pupils  in  daily  attendance . 
The  data  are  from  fifty-seven  cities  reporting  for  the  school  year  1902- 
1903  (see  Table  VII).  The  first  line  of  the  table  gives  the  medians. 
One  half  of  the  cities  spend  less  than  $28.50  or  just  $28.50  per  pupil, 
while  the  other  half  spend  more  than  $28.50  or  just  that  amount  per 
pupil  for  maintenance  and  operation  of  their  schools.  In  like  manner, 
$19.96  marks  the  point  above  and  below  which  half  of  the  cities  lie  in 
their  expenditure  for  teaching  and  supervision;  $18.10  is  the  median  for 
teaching  alone;  $1.75  is  the  median  for  supervision,  and  so  on  for  the 
other  items  given.  In  the  body  of  the  table,  deviations  below  the  me- 
dian are  marked  with  a  minus  sign,  those  above  are  not  marked. 


60  City  School  Expenditures 

Line  number  nine  reads  as  follows:  City  number  eight  spends  $2.66 
per  pupil  more  than  the  median  ($28.50)  for  the  maintenance  and  opera- 
tion of  schools;  $2.37  per  pupil  more  than  the  median  ($19.96)  for  teach- 
ing and  supervision;  the  median  amount,  $18.10  per  pupil,  for  teaching; 
$2.48  per  pupil  more  than  the  median  for  supervision,  etc. 

Table  XXIX  gives  the  medians  and  deviations  from  them  for  the 
per  cent,  which  each  item  is  of  the  total  cost  of  maintenance  and  opera- 
tion. The  data  from  which  this  table  is  derived  are  found  in  Table  III, 
which  gives  information  for  fifty-eight  cities  for  the  school  year  1902- 
1903.  The  first  line  of  the  table  gives  the  medians  for  the  several  items 
of  expenditure  expressed  as  per  cents  and  hundredths  of  a  per  cent.  As 
in  Table  XXVIII,  the  deviations  below  the  median  are  marked  with  a 
minus  sign  while  those  above  are  left  unmarked.  Line  two  reads  as 
follows:  City  number  one  spent  5.5  %  less  than  the  median  (71.15  %) 
for  teaching  and  supervision;  i.e.,  65.65  %  of  the  total  cost  of  mainten- 
ance and,  operation  was  spent  for  teaching  and  supervision.  If  we  skip 
the  next  two  items,  we  find  that  this  city  spent  .42  %  more  than  the 
median  (6.19  %)  for  janitors'  salaries;  2.24  %  more  than  the  median 
(2.91  %)  for  text-books,  etc. 

Table  XXX  gives  medians  and  deviations  on  cost  per  pupil  basis  for 
thirty  cities,  reporting  for  the  school  year  1903-1904.  The  figures  refer 
to  dollars  and  tenths  of  a  dollar.  This  table  is  derived  from  Table  VIII. 
The  explanation  given  for  Table  XXVIII  makes  this  table  clear,  since 
this  table  differs  from  Table  XXVIII  only  in  that  it  is  based  on  the 
second  year's  data  and  in  that  it  gives  the  deviations  for  fewer  items. 

Table  XXXI  gives  medians  and  deviations  for  per  cent,  which  each 
item  is  of  the  total  cost  of  maintenance  and  operation.  The  data  are 
from  thirty  cities  for  the  school  year  1 903-1 904  (see  Table  IV).  The 
figures  refer  to  per  cents  and  tenths  of  one  per  cent.  The  explanation 
for  Table  XXIX,  which  gives  the  same  information  for  the  school  year 
1902-1903,  may  be  referred  to  by  any  one  who  has  difficulty  in  under- 
standing this  table. 

Tables  XXXII  and  XXXIII  give  medians  and  deviations  from 
medians  on  both  cost  per  pupil  and  per  cent,  of  total  basis,  which  are 
based  on  two  years'  figures.  These  tables  are  made  up  by  taking  the 
average  of  the  cost  per  pupil,  or  the  per  cent,  of  total  of  each  item  for 
two  years.  From  these  tables,  giving  the  average  for  each  item  for  two 
years,  medians  are  calculated  and  deviations  found  as  in  the  tables 
based  on  a  single  year's  figures.  These  tables  are  read  precisely  as 
Tables  XXX  and  XXXI. 

From  these  tables  we  can  get  again  the  distribution  of  the 
cases  by  grouping  those  which  vary  by  the  same  amount.     If 


City  School  Expenditures  61 

this  were  done  we  would  get  frequency  tables  similar  to  those 
given  above,  or  if  we  represented  the  distribution  graphically, 
surfaces  of  distribution  like  those  already  given. 

By  examining  these  tables  carefully,  it  will  be  seen  that  cer- 
tain variations  in  one  item  are  accompanied  by  like  variations 
in  some  other  item,  or  that  a  plus  deviation  in  one  item  is  ac- 
companied by  a  negative  deviation  for  the  other,  or  vice  versa. 
Take,  for  example,  the  items  of  janitors'  salaries  and  salaries  for 
teaching  and  supervision,  as  given  in  Table  XXIX  (per  cent,  of 
total  first  year's  figures).  In  these  items  one  is  struck  by  the 
fact  that  a  plus  deviation  in  salaries  paid  janitors  is  often  ac- 
companied by  a  negative  deviation  for  teaching  and  supervision, 
and  vice  versa.  Picking  out  the  cases,  a  table  like  the  following 
may  be  made: 


».  of  City. 

Janitors'  Salaries. 

Salaries  for  Teaching 
and  Supervision. 

I. 

+  4. 

-5.5 

7- 

+  3.3 

-3.4 

9- 

+  1.3 

-1.5 

II. 

+  3. 

-9.9 

14. 

+    .7 

-3.6 

17. 

+    .8 

-    .5 

19. 

+    .6 

-5.9 

23. 

+  8.7 

-13.0 

27. 

+  1.1 

-4.5 

28. 

+  1.0 

-2.0 

29. 

+    .8 

-6.6 

30. 

+    .1 

-    .1 

31. 

+    .4 

-11.8 

34- 

+  1.9 

-2.4 

43- 

+  1.5 

-2.4 

47. 

+  2.3 

-26.9 

52. 

+    .8 

-12.2 

56. 

+  2.2 

-    .2 

6 

-    .9 

+  5.9 

8. 

-    .1 

+    .5 

10 

-    .3 

+  4.3 

20. 

-1.0 

+  2.4 

21. 

-    .3 

+  10.5 

22. 

-2.0 

+  3.9 

25. 

-1.3 

+  6.7 

26. 

-    .3 

+  1.8 

33. 

-    .1 

+  11.1 

36. 

-2.7 

+  5.2 

37- 

-    .8 

+  4.9 

38. 

-2.4 

+  2.8 

39. 

-1.0 

+  2.2 

46. 

-1.6 

+  1.4 

49. 

-2.2 

+  4.8 

51. 

-    .7 

+  8.4 

57. 

-1.5 

+  3.4 

58. 

-    .8 

+  1.6 

TABLE  XXVIII 

Medians  and  deviations  from  medians  for  cost  per  pupil  based  on  the  average 
number  of  pupils  in  daily  attendance,  expressed  as  dollars  and  cents.  Fifty-eight 
cities,  for  the  school  year  1902-03. 


>> 


8 

•i       I 


I 


*      II      1       i       its 


28.50  19. 96  18.10  1.75  1.87  .82 


I. 

7.14 

3.37 

4.20 

-.72 

.48 

1.01 

.54 

2. 

—  .50 

-1.43 

-.50 

-  .82 

.42 

-.33 

3- 

—  .44 

.26 

1.00 

—  .63 

.11 

4- 

3.40 

3.83 

2.25 

1.69 

.40 

.26 

.28 

5- 

4.77 

5.19 

6.31 

—  1.01 

.32 

' 

6. 

-  .85 

1.29 

2.00 

—  .60 

—  .42 

7. 

-6.89 

—  5.34 

—  5.19 

-  .04 

.18 

-  .28 

.17 

8. 

2.66 

2.37 

0 

2.48 

.02 

.73 

.18 

9- 

2.51 

1.53 

2.53 

—  .89 

.45 

10. 

14.73 

2.68 

13.81 

—  1.02 

.69 

.17 

.75 

ii. 

.51 

—  2.19 

-3.68 

1.60 

.78 

12. 

.70 

1.45 

.65 

.91 

.34 

.03 

13. 

1.06 

1.08 

—  2.20 

3.39 

.16 

-.05 

.19 

14. 

.25 

—  .63 

—  .21 

—  .31 

.08 

.07 

.07 

15. 

—  3.15 

—  1.50 

—  .19 

—  1.20 

—  .34 

.19 

.37 

16. 

-  .09 

1.43 

1.07 

.47 

—  .05 

0 

.30 

\l: 

7.50 

5.46 

4.50 

1.07 

.66 

.23 

•  47 

7.20 

6.18 

7.07 

—  .15 

.56 

10. 

.40 

-  .82 

.06 

—  .77 

.10 

.55 

•  18 

20. 

—  5.34 

—  2.89 

—  1.52 

—  1.26 

—  .68 

—  .27 

-.28 

21. 

—  4.00 

.02 

—  1.20 

1.33 

—  .43 

-.26 

22. 

—  19.56 

—  13.22 

—  11.47 

—  1.64 

—  1.40 

—  .11 

23. 

—  15,65 

—  12.49 

—  14.41 

2.03 

.05 

24. 

—  13.24 

—  8.68 

-8.23 

—  .34 

—  .91 

-.72 

—  .42 

25. 

2.50 

4.16 

3.57 

.75 

—  .34 

—  .71 

-  .53 

26. 

4.17 

3.88 

.27 

3.72 

.05 

-  .16 

.35 

27. 

1.54 

—  2.03 

—  2.99 

1.07 

.08 

.82 

28. 

1.80 

1.00 

1.67 

-  .56 

.32 

62 


TABLE  XXVIII  (Continued) 

Medians  and  deviations  from  medians  for  cost  per  pupil  based  on  the  average 
[number  of  pupils  in  daily  attendance,  expressed  as  dollars  and  cents.  Fifty-eight 
cities,  for  the  school  year  1902-03. 


£  "8  ..•  •? 


§1  Id 


ill!        1      b 


iians.  1.68  1.63  1.09  .18  .18  .14  .63 

39  .29        —.11        —.47 

03  —.11 
02 

06  .09 

06  —.02        —.05 

.01 
11 

04  —.10        —.08 


I. 

1.33 

0 

.79 

2. 

—  .13 

3.07 

.41 

3- 

.04 

-.31 

0 

4- 

.32 

—  .10 

—  .03 

5- 

.31 

.40 

—  .73 

6. 

.13 

—  .49 

0 

7- 

—  .33 

—  .83 

.34 

8. 

.33 

.19 

.08 

9- 

1.28 

—  1.04 

10. 

.70 

.21 

1.20 

ii. 

.14 

.15 

12. 

.42 

—  .06 

13. 

—  .08 

.32 

—  .32 

14. 

—  .08 

.93 

15. 

.34 

.08 

—  .40 

16. 

.08 

—  .19 

—  .05 

17. 

.48 

1.01 

.34 

18. 

.67 

—  .11 

19. 

.51 

.45 

.55 

20. 

-  .77 

.66 

—  .24 

21. 

—  .69 

—  .15 

22. 

—  1.26 

-.50 

23. 

—  .36 

—  .19 

24. 

—  1.36 

—  .60 

—  .64 

25. 

—  1.46 

.41 

.74 

26. 

-  .03 

—  .18 

.03 

27. 

—  .38 

-  .46 

28. 

.46 

.65 

.79 

-.10  1.33 

—  .03  —.12 
.04  —  .  08 

—  .15  —.11 

—  .05  .07 

—  .01  .17 

.02 

.02  —.10 

-  .13 

—  .01 
.07  .26 
.06  .      .26 


12 

08 
12 

—  .26 

—  .46 

06 

-.55 

—  .41 

06 

13 

02 

—  .44 

92 
14 

.55 

63 


TABLE  XXVIII  {Continued) 

Medians  and  deviations  from  medians  for  cost  per  pupil  based  on  the  average 
number  of  pupils  in  daily  attendance,  expressed  as  dollars  and  cents.  Fifty-eight 
cities,  for  the  school  year  1902-03. 


— 

*r3    . 

5  B 

a  0 

1 

1 

xA 

1 

-3 
1 

G 

i 

u 

V 

ft 

*c3 
co 

i 

0 
0 

i 

g 

j* 

3 

+» 

<u 

CO 

3 

£& 

H 

CO 

'S 

•-1 

H 

Medians. 

28.50 

19.96 

18.10 

1.75 

1.87 

.82 

.64 

29. 

1.00 

-.89 

.11 

-  .89 

.19 

30. 

8.82 

6.30 

7.15 

-.74 

.49 

-  .18 

.40 

31. 

-.60 

-3.42 

—  2.35 

-  .96 

-  .03 

32. 

5.99 

.40 

.97 

—  .46 

.06 

-  .45 

0 

33. 

—  3.65 

0 

—  1.32 

1.43 

-  .35 

-  .47 

34. 

7.46 

4.75 

5.05 

—  .19 

1.05 

—  .80 

—  .31 

35. 

—  3.98 

—  1.60 

-  .23 

—  1.26 

—  .27 

-.80 

36. 

3.44 

4.46 

.78 

3.79 

—  .76 

—  .43 

37- 

—  9.24 

—  5.31 

-6.70 

1.50 

—  .86 

38. 

—  4.94 

—  3.00 

—  2.89 

0 

—  .96 

—  .77 

—  .54 

39- 

3.51 

3.53 

1.84 

1.80 

—  .20 

—  .08 

40. 

6.29 

3.36 

3.80 

—  .33 

—  .49 

—  .22 

.81 

41. 

—  3.85 

—  2.94 

—  2.11 

—  .72 

-.74 

42. 

0 

—  .06 

—  2.63 

2.58 

—  .38 

.61 

.48 

43- 

—  2.41 

—  2.04 

—  1.10 

-  .83 

—  .14 

-.33 

—  .19 

44- 

—  2.32 

—  2.08 

—  1.41 

-.56 

—  .29 

—  .51 

45- 

.03 

-.18 

1.04 

—  1.11 

—  .34 

.73 

-  .29 

46. 

13.02 

10.28 

7.43 

2.96 

.04 

.37 

.08 

47. 

—  7.79 

—  10.81 

—  12.32 

1.62 

—  .12 

—  .13 

48. 

—  5.75 

—  4.44 

—  4.81 

.48 

-.51 

.15 

—  .33 

49. 

—  6.30 

—  3.07 

—  3.90 

.94 

-.98 

.33 

—  .42 

1       50. 

5i. 

3.55 

5.54 

2.95 

2.70 

—  .11 

-.23 

—  .49 

52. 

—  2.11 

—  4.40 

—  4.29 

0 

—  .03 

-.03 

.28 

53- 

2.11 

4.27 

2.39 

1.99 

.24 

54. 

26.22 

6.51 

12.50 

4.12 

1.18 

1.29 

1.86 

55. 

-8.00 

-6.66 

—  5.49 

—  1.06 

—  .78 

56. 

—  .49 

—  .07 

—  2.77 

2.81 

.48 

—  .37 

—  .12 

57. 

22.75 

18.33 

15.10 

3.34 

.55 

.52 

1.59 

58. 

—  6.99 

-4.33 

—  4.55 

.33 

—  .70 

64 


TABLE  XXVIII  {Continued) 

Medians  and  deviations  from  medians  for  cost  per  pupil  based  on  the  average 
'number  of  pupils  in  daily  attendance,  expressed  as  dollars  and  cents.  Fifty-eight 
cities,  for  the  school  year  1902-03. 


>> 

8 

id 

to  M 

to 

•h 
o 
u 

1 

H 

1 
ft 

0, 

CD 

§ 

-<u 

g 

e- 

dians. 

1.68 

1.63 

1.09 

29. 

.33 

—  .12 

30. 

0 

.22 

1.66 

31- 

—  .12 

1.86 

.70 

32. 

—  .67 

.62 

2.58 

33- 

—  .39 

.08 

34- 

-1.33 

1.98 

-.57 

35- 

—  .24 

—  .41 

36. 

.03 

-.37 

37- 

—  .48 

—  .64 

38. 

—  1.53 

-.33 

1.23 

39- 

.27 

40. 

.37 

.12 

41. 

—  .28 

—  .14 

-1.05 

42. 

.87 

—  .29 

43- 

-.74 

.68 

—  .44 

44- 

.99 

.03 

45- 

.22 

.55 

.89 

46. 

.23 

0 

—  .02 

47. 

1.71 

1.64 

48. 

-.40 

—  .24 

-  .75 

49- 

-  .31 

—  .41 

-  .80 

50. 

51. 

-  .94 

.16 

-.50 

52. 

.03 

2.86 

53- 

—  .09 

54- 

2.93 

1.09 

1.21 

55. 

.46 

-  .49 

—  .52 

56. 

—  .71 

—  .41 

.41 

57- 

1.89 

.38 

1.14 

58. 

-  .29 

—  .94 

.03 

18 


18 
69 

44 
03 

24 


—  .12 
.01 

—  .02 
.15 

0 

—  .02 

—  .04 


41 
25 
09 
03 


-  .14 

.25 
.08 
.12 

0 

.28 


18 


17  -. 


03 

05 
02 

,01 

0 


.02 

.04 

0 

.13 

.05 
.14 
.13 

.02 


.07 
.08 

1.03 
.11 

—  .12 

.04 

-.15 


if 

.14 

.05 
.29 

.52 

.08 

.14 

.16 
1.23 


03 
04 
03 
.01 

12 

0 

.07 

02 


12 
.08 

,07 
10 

,02 
.09 
29 


5  . 

O  to 
<U   <D 

SCO 
1 

II 
r 


63 


.38 
.66 
.61 
.46 
.36 

.94 

0 

.32 

.18 

.64 

.06 

.05 

.59 

.10 
.57 


-.16 

.03 
1.38 

-.38 


65 


TABLE  XXIX 

Medians  and  deviations  from  medians  for  the  per  cent,  which  each  item  is  of  the 
total  cost  of  maintenance  and  operation.  Fifty-eight  cities,  for  the  school  year 
1902-03.     The  figures  refer  to  per  cents  and  hundredths  of  per  cents. 


8 

T3     . 

88 

j 

1 

i 

at 

8 

o 

bc'wj 

to 

i 

1 

0 

0 

V 

£$ 

j 

■> 

u 

1 

in 

3 

a 
O 

'S 

n 

•t-> 

! 

§1 

CO  o< 

% 

a 

>-> 

H 

Medians. 

71.15 

7.62 

63.44 

6.19 

2.91 

1.85 

5.98 

i. 

—  5.5 

-4.73 

—  .82 

.42 

2.24 

1.47 

2.48 

2. 

—  4.75 

-4.31 

—  .33 

1.55 

—  .76 

—  .44 

3- 

.99 

-3.63 

4.71 

.88 

.16 

4- 

2.22 

3.07 

.24 

.92 

.48 

1.04 

.29 

5- 

4.80 

-5.38 

10.27 

.43 

.06 

6. 

5.85 

-3.47 

9.41 

—  .93 

.57 

7. 

—  3.44 

.31 

—  3.66 

3.31 

—  .41 

1.90 

.26 

8. 

.54 

5.97 

—  5.34 

—  .11 

2.06 

—  .37 

.46 

9. 

—  1.49 

—  4.83 

3.43 

1.30 

.76 

10. 

4.34 

—  5.93 

10.36 

—  .28 

—  .60 

1.37 

-.46 

ii. 

—  9.89 

3.93 

-13.73 

2.95 

12. 

2.17 

1.53 

.76 

1.39 

.57 

13. 

.05 

9.73 

—  9.59 

.69 

—  .30 

.97 

-  .56 

14. 

—  3.62 

—  2.58 

—  .95 

.65 

.23 

.65 

-.35 

15. 

2.25 

—  5.46 

7.80 

0 

1.07 

2.12 

1.96 

16. 

4.16 

.20 

4.05 

.22 

0 

1.47 

.24 

17. 

—  .52 

.20 

—  .63 

.84 

.01 

1.22 

0 

18. 

3.74 

—  3.14 

6.97 

.60 

19. 

—  5.86 

—  3.22 

—  .55 

.62 

1.83 

.99 

1.59 

20. 

2.38 

—  5.49 

8.04 

—  1.04 

—  .52 

-  .30 

—  3.05 

21. 

10.54 

4.97 

5.66 

—  .31 

-.31 

22. 

3.92 

—  6.44 

10.45 

—  2.01 

4.00 

23. 

—  12.96 

21.79 

—  34.66 

8.73 

24. 

2.81 

1.61 

1.29 

.08 

—  2.23 

-  .43 

—  4.77 

25. 

6.67 

.28 

6.58 

—  1.25 

—  2.57 

—  1.52 

-5.32 

26. 

1.82 

9.11 

—  7.20 

—  .32 

—  .88 

1.20 

—  .90 

27. 

—  4.54 

2.80 

—  6.25 

1.07 

3.19 

.07 

1.89 

28. 

—  2.03 

-3.71 

1.77 

1.04 

—  2.21 

29. 

—  6.64 

-4.71 

-1.84 

.80 

.84 

66 


TABLE  XXIX  (Continued) 

Medians  and  deviations  from  medians  for  the  per  cent,  which  each  item  is  of  the 
total  cost  of  maintenance  and  operation.  Fifty-eight  cities,  for  the  school  year 
1902-03.     The  figures  refer  to  per  cents  and  hundredths  of  per  cents. 


S 

4 

3 

§8 

CO 
O   CO 

u 

1 

I 

! 

! 
1 

is? 
8! 

It 
Is 

11 

Medians. 

5.91 

3.92 

.6 

.6 

.49 

1.64 

i. 

—  1.35 

1.35 

—  .20 

.86 

—.44 

0 

2. 

10.89 

1.45 

—  .10 

-.35 

3- 

—  1.20 

—  .04 

-.08 

4- 

—  1.13 

—  .61 

—  .25 

.24 

5- 

.20 

—  2.93 

—  .27 

—  .10 

—  .24 

6. 

—  1.80 

.03 

.09 

7« 

—  2.20 

2.71 

—  .30 

8. 

—  .08 

—  .15 

—  .17 

-.35 

-.32 

9- 

3.49 

—  3.79 

2.95 

10. 

—  1.65 

1.38 

ii. 

.19 

.35 

-.36 

5.11 

12. 

1.89 

—  .41 

13- 

.68 

—  1.32 

—  .13 

-.39 

-.44 

-.85 

14. 

—  2.33 

3.16 

.15 

—  .25 

--.31 

—  1.04 

15. 

.82 

—  1.18 

-.52 

—  .32 

—  .44 

16. 

—  .85 

.10 

17. 

1.43 

.07 

-.27 

.09 

—  .29 

-1.42 

18. 

.51 

-1.17 

-.03 

19. 

1.27 

1.76 

.63 

20. 

3.95 

—  .25 

-.71 

21. 

—  2.08 

—  .09 

.17 

-.20 

22. 

—  1.81 

2.68 

23. 

4.00 

3.11 

.88 

1.56 

24. 

.80 

—  .99 

—  .37 

25. 

.67 

3.00 

—  .43 

-.16 

26. 

-1.47 

-.50 

—  .07 

2.74 

27. 

—  1.24 

-1.57 

.31 

1.05 

.52 

2.76 

28. 

1.64 

.16 

1.29 

29. 

-.82 

.59 

.13 

67 


TABLE  XXIX  {Continued) 

Medians  and  deviations  from  medians  for  the  per  cent,  which  each  item  is  of  the 
total  cost  of  maintenance  and  operation.  Fifty-eight  cities,  for  the  school  year 
1902-03.     The  figures  refer  to  per  cents  and  hundredths  of  per  cents. 


13    . 

i 

'6 

§§ 

i 

a 

M 

■ 

eS 

■8 

u 

& 

ii 

•55 

I 

1 

2 

0 
0 

n 

•+* 

a 

3 
CO 

II 

it 

£CO 

1 

£co 

CO 

& 

'1 
>-> 

H 

S 

Medians. 

71.15 

7.62 

63.44 

6.19 

2.91 

1.85 

5.98 

30. 

—  .05 

-4.91 

4.95 

.13 

—  1.19 

.93 

—  1.49 

3i. 

—  11.76 

-4.78 

—  6.99 

.40 

-  .37 

32. 

—  12.12 

-3.88 

-8.15 

—  .59 

-1.84 

.02 

—  3.05 

33- 

11.17 

5.18 

4.08 

—  .05 

-1.16 

34- 

—  2.37 

—  3.19 

1.01 

1.94 

—  2.85 

-.93 

-5.01 

35- 

4.05 

—  5.60 

9.74 

.36 

—  2.82 

36. 

5.20 

9.65 

—  4.46 

-2.73 

-1.20 

37- 

4.92 

9.27 

—  4.26 

-  .83 

38. 

2.80 

—  .21 

1.10 

—  2.35 

—  2.69 

-1.43 

-5.35 

39. 

2.19 

3.47 

—  1.19 

—  .99 

—  .10 

40. 

—  3.92 

-3.58 

—  .25 

—  2.25 

-1.17 

2.29 

—  .11 

41. 

-2.07 

—  4.42 

1.44 

—  1.60 

—  .30 

42. 

—  1.46 

6.86 

—  9.23 

—  .96 

2.13 

2.06 

2.96 

43. 

—  2.37 

—  3.99 

1.81 

1.46 

—  1.03 

-.16 

-2.42 

44- 

—  2.85 

—  2.97 

.31 

—  .14 

—  1.72 

45. 

-1.81 

—  5.36 

3.64 

-.85 

2.54 

-.64 

.67 

46. 

1.41 

3.68 

—  2.18 

—  1.63 

-.05 

-  .13 

-1.41 

47. 

—  26.94 

8.69 

—  35.54 

2.25 

.44 

48. 

—  4.97 

2.16 

—  5.04 

—  .21 

1.38 

-.49 

-.34 

49. 

4.83 

4.48 

.44 

—  2.16 

2.28 

-.84 

.21 

50. 

—  1.30 

—  .66 

-.55 

-2.80 

1.60 

—  .26 

.11 

5i. 

8.39 

6.26 

2.22 

—  .72 

—  1.04 

-1.38 

—  3.65 

52. 

—  12.21 

—  1.02 

—  11.10 

.81 

.08 

1.63 

.48 

53. 

7.52 

4.17 

3.44 

.70 

54. 

—  4.42 

3.12 

—  7.45 

—  .53 

.94 

2.72 

2.43 

55. 

-6.30 

-4.17 

—  1.94 

—  .88 

2.69 

56. 

—  .24 

8.67 

—  8.82 

2.18 

—  1.30 

0 

-2.53 

57. 

3.42 

2.30 

1.21 

—  1.47 

—  .29 

2.50 

.98 

58. 

1.60 

2.03 

—  .34 

—  .78 

.50 

68 


TABLE  XXIX  {Continued) 

Medians  and  deviations  from  medians  for  the  per  cent,  which  each  item  is  of  the 
total  cost  of  maintenance  and  operation.  Fifty-eight  cities,  for  the  school  year 
1902-03.     The  figures  refer  to  per  cents  and  hundredths  of  per  cents. 


s 

o 

u 

1 

1 

I 

3 

1 

CO 

< 

si 

SI 

CO 

3  . 

O   UJ 

II 

Medians. 

5.91 

3.92 

.6 

.06 

.49 

1.64 

30. 

-.97 

3.43 

.32 

—  .42 

.65 

3i. 

6.59 

2.49 

.66 

1.98 

32. 

.62 

6.69 

1.89 

.02 

2.11 

33. 

-.92 

.79 

—  1.57 

34- 

4.09 

—  2.46 

1.09 

.05 

-1.16 

35- 

—  .22 

—  1.12 

—  .04 

.07 

.38 

.24 

30\ 

-  .74 

—  1.65 

.68 

-.01 

.35 

3.25 

37- 

.08 

—  1.58 

1.62 

38. 

5.90 

-.39 

.18 

.74 

—  .33 

39- 

.32 

3.85 

40. 

2.81 

-  .45 

-.09 

-.36 

41. 

.16 

-3.74 

0 

.35 

42. 

—  .32 

—  1.12 

.52 

-.04 

-  .14 

43. 

2.95 

—  1.42 

.07 

.25 

.16 

1.17 

44* 

4.09 

.38 

-.02 

.09 

—  .09 

45- 

-3.13 

3.02 

-.16 

-.43 

.01 

0 

46. 

—  2.00 

-1.34 

.79 

-  .05 

.11 

-1.54 

47- 

10.18 

9.28 

1.44 

-.43 

.13 

48. 

.25 

—  2.43 

-  .23 

-.38 

—  .22 

1.57 

49- 

—  .45 

—  2.59 

.30 

.30 

0 

-1.36 

50. 

.35 

2.97 

1.51 

51- 

-.33 

—  2.06 

—  .48 

.18 

.29 

52. 

11.03 

.39 

-  .31 

.15 

53- 

—  .59 

.78 

54- 

—  .94 

.29 

—  .14 

1.62 

.12 

—  .44 

55. 

—  .32 

-1.12 

.80 

.80 

-.63 

56. 

-1.54 

1.42 

0 

-.40 

-.09 

-.76 

57- 

—  1.99 

.43 

.27 

-  .17 

-.06 

58. 

-1.67 

1.26 

-.47 

1.45 

TABLE  XXX 

Medians  and  deviations  from  medians  for  cost  per  pupil  based  on  the  average 
number  of  pupils  in  daily  attendance,  expressed  as  dollars  and  cents.     Thirty  cities, 
or  the  school  year  1903-04.     The  figures  refer  to  dollars  and  tenths  of  dollars. 


s 

| 

ij 

! 

I 

•1 

CO 

8» 

i 

t 

"3 

j 

£ 

11 

1 

1 

CO 

1 

2 

& 

Ok 

35 

c5 

tH 

Medians. 

29.08 

21.19 

18.90 

1.74 

1.91 

1.61 

1.67 

1.12 

5- 

5.0 

4.3 

5.9 

—  1.0 

.4 

-.3 

1.1 

—  .7 

6. 

-4:8 

—  5.4 

—  4.2 

—  .6 

—  .3 

0 

.2 

1.1 

8. 

3.3 

2.5 

3.7 

2.5 

0 

.2 

.1 

0 

13. 

5.1 

4.3 

2.0 

3.4 

0 

.2 

.6 

—  .3 

14. 

—  .3 

—  1.2 

—  .3 

—  .4 

.4 

0 

.2 

IS- 

—  4.4 

-2.5 

—  4.2 

2.1 

—  .4 

—  .2 

—  .2 

—  .4 

16. 

—  .9 

.1 

.3 

.4 

0 

—  .1 

.3 

—  .3 

20. 

—  6.0 

-3.8 

—  2.2 

—  1.1 

—  .6 

.4 

.3 

—  .6 

27. 

—  2.8 

—  3.0 

-4.3 

1.9 

.1 

0 

—  1.1 

—  .1 

28. 

.3 

—  .6 

.6 

—  .6 

.2 

-.7 

29. 

—  4.4 

—  5.6 

—  1.1 

-1.0 

.2 

.4 

—  .2 

.1 

30. 

9.6 

5.8 

7.1 

—  .8 

.5 

0 

2.4 

3i. 

1.8 

0 

1.5 

—  .9 

.1 

.4 

1.7 

32. 

—  1.1 

—  1.1 

-3.4 

2.9 

.1 

-.8 

0 

-  .1 

34- 

2.5 

.4 

1.3 

—  .4 

2.5 

—  .5 

.5 

35- 

.8 

2.2 

2.8 

—  .1 

—  .5 

—  1.5 

.3 

.3 

36. 

2.6 

5.3 

2.3 

3.6 

—  .7 

.4 

—  1.2 

37. 

-8.4 

—  5.4 

-6.7 

1.9 

—  .8 

0 

—  .2 

39. 

—  .3 

.3 

—  1.1 

1.9 

—  .3 

0 

40. 

2.1 

.2 

—  3.2 

3.9 

-.8 

.4 

.1 

41. 

-3.7 

-3.2 

-4.5 

1.8 

—  .8 

-  .2 

.2 

—  .2 

42. 

0 

—  .9 

—  3.2 

2.9 

—  .4 

1.1 

—  .3 

—  .1 

43. 

1.4 

1.7 

3.2 

—  .8 

0 

—  .7 

—  .7 

—  .2 

45- 

0 

0 

.5 

.1 

—  .2 

0 

—  .5 

.4 

48. 

—  1.4 

-1.5 

-3.2 

2.3 

—  .4 

.4 

—  .3 

—  .1 

52. 

—  .1 

—  2.1 

-1.5 

—  .1 

.4 

.5 

—  .6 

.3 

54. 

.    19.1 

9.8 

6.3 

4.0 

.7 

7.1 

.2 

55. 

—  11.2 

-8.0 

—  6.8 

—  .6 

—  .9 

—  .5 

-.8 

—  .7 

56. 

1.9 

1.0 

2.0 

—  .4 

.7 

-.3 

—  .3 

0 

57. 

23.4 

17.9 

15.2 

.33 

1.0 

1.6 

.4 

1.1 

70 


TABLE  XXXI 

Medians  and  deviations  from  medians  for  the  per  cent,  which  each  item  is  of  the 
total  cost  of  maintenance  and  operation.  Thirty  cities,  for  the  year  1903-04.  The 
figures  refer  to  per  cents  and  tenths  of  per  cents. 


*o  . 

5 

'6 

§§ 

60 

B 

§ 

U3    ■ 

u 

I! 
4 

J 

3 

1 

11 

"3 

3 

J 

1 
1 

,2 

! 

1    3 

ft 

1 

£w 

CO 

1 

•-> 

£ 

iians. 

71.7 

64.2 

6.3 

6.1 

5.5 

5.8 

5- 

3.2 

8.5 

—  4.1 

6 

—  1.7 

2.3 

6. 

—  6.5 

—  3.7 

—  1.6 

.5 

1.2 

2.0 

8. 

1.6 

5.8 

—  3.0 

—  .4 

.1 

—  .3 

13. 

2.8 

-3.3 

7.1 

—  .5 

—  .2 

.8 

14. 

—  2.4 

.2 

—  1.4 

1.8 

.1 

15. 

4.4 

-3.7 

9.3 

.3 

0 

0 

16. 

4.2 

4.1 

1.1 

.6 

—  .5 

1.3 

20. 

4.0 

8.8 

—  3.3 

—  .6 

—  .1 

1.6 

27. 

—  1.9 

—  8.6 

7.7 

1.8 

.7 

-3.6 

28. 

—  1.4 

2.2 

-2.5 

1.0 

-2.5 

29. 

—  4.7 

—  .3 

-3.2 

2.3 

.3 

30. 

—  1.7 

3.1 

—  3.7 

.2 

—  1.5 

31. 

—  3.1 

1.7 

-3.7 

.5 

4.3 

32. 

0 

-8.9 

10.1 

1.2 

-2.7 

.2 

34- 

-3.1 

—  .1 

-1.9 

4.6 

—  2.2 

11 

6.6 

8.4 

—  .8 

—  1.3 

-5.0 

.5 

13.7 

4.0 

10.8 

—  2.4 

.7 

37- 

4.7 

—  5.4 

11.3 

—  .8 

2.1 

39- 

2.9 

—  2.2 

6.4 

—  .6 

40. 

—  2.6 

—  13.3 

11.9 

—  2.4 

1.0 

41. 

—  .7 

—  7.4 

7.8 

—  1.6 

0 

1.6 

42. 

—  1.7 

—  10.1 

9.7 

—  .9 

3.7 

-1.0 

43- 

3.6 

8.0 

-3.2 

.2 

—  2.5 

—  2.7 

45- 

1.5 

2.6 

0 

—  .4 

0 

—  1.7 

48. 

—  .7 

—  7.7 

8.1 

-.7 

1.5 

—  .7 

52. 

-5.7 

—  4.0 

—  .7 

1.8 

2.7 

-2.0 

54- 

-5.5 

—  12.1 

5.7 

—  .8 

12.5 

0 

55- 

1.9 

3.1 

0 

—  .2 

.5 

—  .8 

56 

0 

3.0 

—  1.9 

2.2 

—  1.3 

—  1.4 

57 

2.9 

.7 

3.3 

—  .5 

—  1.8 

7i 


TABLE  XXXII 

Medians  and  deviations  from  medians  for  average  cost  per  pupil  for  two  years 
based  on  the  average  number  of  pupils  in  daily  attendance.  The  figures  refer  to 
dollars  and  tenths  of  dollars.  Thirty  cities,  reporting  for  two  school  years,  1902-03 
and  1903-04. 


rt  o  bo  o 


5* 

3 

I  II       Hs       i      i      if      * 


Medians.  28.8  20.5  18.3  2.2  1.9  1.6  1.7  1.1 


5- 

5.9 

4.9 

6.3 

-1.4 

.4 

0 

.7 

-  .7 

6. 

-2.8 

—  1.9 

-  .9 

-1.0 

—  .3 

.1 

—  .2 

.6 

8. 

3.0 

2.5 

2.0 

.5 

0 

.3 

.1 

.1 

13. 

3.1 

2.8 

.1 

2.7 

.1 

.1 

.4 

-  .3 

14. 

0 

-.8 

—  .1 

—  .8 

.2 

0 

.8 

.6 

15. 

-3.3 

—  1.9 

—  1.9 

0 

-  .3 

0 

—  .1 

-  .4 

16. 

—  .4 

.9 

.9 

0 

0 

0 

0 

—  .1 

20. 

-5.7 

-3.2 

—  1.7 

—  1.6 

—  .6 

—  .6 

.4 

—  .4 

11: 

—  2.7 

—  2.4 

—  3.5 

1.1 

.1 

0 

-  .8 

—  .2 

1.0 

.3 

1.3 

—  1.0 

.3 

-.6 

29. 

-1.7 

-2.7 

—  1.3 

-1.4 

.2 

.3 

-  .2 

.2 

30. 

9.2 

6.2 

7.3 

-1.2 

.5 

0 

2.1 

31. 

.6 

1.6 

—  .2 

—  1.4 

.1 

1.6 

1.2 

32. 

2.4 

—  .2 

—  1.0 

.8 

.1 

-.7 

.3 

1.3 

34. 

4.9 

4.7 

3.4 

-  .7 

1.3 

.7 

0 

II: 

—  1.6 

.4 

1.5 

—  1.1 

-  .3 

—  .1 

0 

3.0 

5.0 

1.7 

3.2 

—  .7 

.1 

-  .7 

37. 

—  8.8 

-5.3 

-6.5 

1.3 

—  .8 

—  .3 

—  .4 

39. 

1.6 

2.0 

.6 

1.4 

—  .2 

.3 

.2 

40. 

4.2 

1.9 

.5 

1.3 

—  .6 

.4 

.8 

.1 

41. 

-3.8 

—  3.0 

-3.1 

.1 

-  .7 

—  .2 

0 

-.6 

42. 

0 

-3.4 

—  2.7 

2.3 

—  .4 

1.0 

—  .2 

—  .2 

43. 

—  .5 

0 

1.2 

—  1.2 

0 

—  .7 

0 

—  .3 

9 

0 

0 

1.0 

-  .9 

—  .3 

.1 

—  .5 

.6 

—  3.5 

-2.9 

—  3.8 

.9 

—  .4 

0 

—  .2 

—  .4 

52. 

—  1.1 

-3.1 

—  2.7 

-  .5 

.2 

.3 

—  .6 

1.6 

54. 

22.7 

13.3 

9.6 

3.6 

1.0 

4.5 

.6 

-  .8 

55. 

—  7.6 

—  7.2 

-6.0 

—  1.3 

—  .8 

—  .5 

-  .7 

—  .7 

56. 

.7 

.6 

—  .2 

.8 

.6 

—  .5 

—  .3 

.2 

57. 

23.1 

18.2 

15.3 

2.9 

.8 

1.7 

.3 

1.1 

72 


TABLE  XXXIII 

Medians  and  deviations  from  medians  for  per  cent,  of  total  which  each  item  is, 
based  on  average  for  two  years.  Thirty  cities,  reporting  for  the  school  years  1902-03 
and  1903-04.     The  figures  refer  to  per  cents  and  tenths  of  per  cents. 


>» 

3 

•0 

8 

! 

T3    . 

fi 
If 

$ 

1 

I 

& 

1 

1 

1 

2 

W   V) 

y  Hi 

if 

51 

1 

2 

I 

I 

H"3 

CO 

—> 

s 

Medians. 

70.7 

63.1 

8.0 

6.1 

5.7 

5.9 

3.5 

5- 

4.7 

10.1 

-5.8 

.6 

—  .5 

1.2 

-2.6 

6. 

.3 

3.6 

-3.6 

—  .1 

.9 

.1 

3.0 

8. 

1.8 

.9 

.4 

—  .1 

.3 

—  .2 

.1 

13- 

2.1 

-3.7 

7.4 

.2 

—  .4 

.7 

—  1.0 

14. 

-2.3 

.3 

-3.1 

1.3 

—  .1 

2.2 

2.4 

15. 

4.0 

2.7 

.9 

.2 

1.0 

.3 

-.7 

16. 

4.8 

4.8 

—  .4 

.5 

—  .1 

.2 

0 

20. 

3.9 

9.1 

—  5.4 

—  .8 

-1.3 

2.7 

—  .5 

27. 

—  2.6 

-7.2 

4.6 

1.5 

1.3 

—  2.4 

.1 

28. 

-1.0 

2.7 

—  4.1 

1.0 

-2.3 

29. 

—  5.0 

-.3 

—  5.0 

1.6 

1.2 

—  .3 

—  1.4 

30. 

—  .2 

4.7 

—  5.4 

.2 

—  1.3 

4.8 

3i. 

-6.7 

—  1.9 

-5.3 

.5 

5.3 

4.3 

32. 

—  5.3 

—  8.8 

2.1 

.3 

-2.9 

.4 

3.6 

34- 

—  2.1 

1.1 

—  3.6 

3.3 

.7 

—  .2 

35. 

6.0 

9.8 

—  4.2 

-  .4 

-5.4 

0 

.3 

36. 

10.1 

—    5 

9.2 

-2.5 

—  5.0 

—  .1 

—  2.3 

37. 

5.5 

—  3.9 

9.2 

-  .9 

1.0 

—  .1 

39. 

3.2 

—  1.0 

3.9 

-  .7 

.6 

.6 

40. 

—  2.6 

—  6.1 

3.1 

-2.3 

.4 

1.4 

.1 

41. 

—  .7 

—  2.2 

1.1 

-1.6 

—  .1 

.8 

-1.7 

42. 

—  .9 

-9.0 

7.7 

-  .9 

3.4 

—  .8 

—  .4 

43. 

1.3 

5.6 

—  4.7 

.3 

-2.4 

0 

—  .8 

& 

.5 

3.8 

—  3.7 

—  .6 

.4 

—  2.0 

2.4 

—  2.2 

-5.7 

4.1 

—  .4 

.6 

-.3 

—  .8 

52. 

-8.3 

—  6.9 

—  1.9 

.3 

1.6 

-2.3 

6.3 

54. 

—  5.3 

—  9.1 

3.3 

—  .7 

7.5 

—  1.1 

0 

55. 

—  1.5 

1.3 

—  3.2 

—  .5 

.1 

—  .8 

—  1.5 

56. 

.5 

—  2.2 

2.3 

2.2 

—  1.9 

—  1.5 

.9 

57. 

3.8 

1.7 

1.7 

-1.0 

-2.0 

.7 

73 


74  City  School  Expenditures 

There  are  thirty-six  cases  in  which  a  positive  deviation  for 
one  item  is  accompanied  by  a  negative  deviation  for  the  other, 
and  only  twenty -one  cases  where  like  deviations  occur  for  both 
items.  One  might  seem  justified  in  declaring  that  a  negative 
relationship  exists.  It  is  not  possible  from  the  table  to  tell  how 
large  this  negative  relationship  is,  much  less  to  express  it  in  a 
single  significant  figure.  It  is  just  here  that  the  great  value  of 
the  Pearson  Coefficient  of  Correlation  x  comes  in. 

In  the  next  set  of  tables  (see  Tables  XXXIV  and  XXXV) 
the  deviations  are  given  as  a  per  cent,  of  the  median.  The 
gross  deviations  from  the  median  are  significant,  especially  when 
deviations  for  different  items  are  compared  with  each  other  as 
indicated  above,  but  the  range  of  variability  is  better  indicated, 
I  believe,  by  giving  the  per  cent,  of  the  median  or  other  single 
figure  indicating  a  central  tendency.  For  example,  the  median 
for  janitors'  salaries  (first  years'  figures,  per  cent,  basis)  is 
6.2  %,  and  for  salaries  for  teaching  and  supervision  it  is  71.2  %. 
Now,  a  deviation  of  .6  %  in  the  case  of  janitors'  salaries  seems 
insignificant  when  compared  with  a  deviation  of  7.1  %  for 
teaching  and  supervision — the  one  is  almost  twelve  times  the 
other ;  but  when  we  remember  that  each  one  represents  a  devia- 
tion equivalent  to  about  10  %  of  the  median,  we  are  nearer 
recognizing  their  real  significance,  I  believe,  than  when  we  con- 
sider them  merely  in  gross.  Even  this  method  of  comparison 
is,  however,  misleading,  since  it  is  absolutely  impossible  for  the 
items  "teaching  and  supervision"  or  "teaching"  to  vary  as 
much  as  100  %  above  or  below  the  median  when  the  per  cent, 
of  the  total  is  taken  as  the  basis  of  comparison,  because  the 
median  for  teaching  and  supervision  amounts  to  70.7  %,  and 
for  teaching  to  63.1  %  of  the  total.  On  the  cost  per  pupil  basis, 
while  it  is  not  impossible  to  have  a  variation  equal  to  100  %  of 
the  median,  or  greater,  for  these  larger  items,  yet,  even  if  such 
variations  occur,  they  are  not  comparable  to  variations  which 
give  the  same  per  cent,  of  the  median  where  this  item  represents 
a  very  much  smaller  part  of  the  total  expenditure.2     Even  after 

1  The  reader  not  versed  in  statistical  methods  is  referred  to  Thorn- 
dike's  Mental  and  Social  Measurements  (The  Science  Press,  1904),  where  he 
will  find  a  most  satisfactory  treatment  of  this  and  other  statistical  methods. 

3  For  discussion  of  this  point,  see  Thorndike,  Mental  and  Social 
Measurements,  pp.  102  and  103 


City  School  Expenditures  75 

these  qualifications  (which  show  us  that  we  must  be  on  our 
guard  in  comparing  variabilities  for  different  items)  have  been 
made,  I  am  still  of  the  opinion  that  these  tables  are  very  help- 
ful in  giving  us  a  correct  idea  of  the  variability  of  all  items,  as 
well  as  permitting  us  to  compare  the  variability  of  items  whose 
medians  represent  about  the  same  proportion  of  the  total  or 
nearly  the  same  cost  per  pupil. 

In  Table  XXXIV  the  items  which  apparently  show  the  least 
variability  are  "total,"  "teaching  and  supervision,"  and  "  teach- 
ing." As  noted  above,  any  deviation  above  the  median  is  pos- 
sible; i.  e.,  the  deviation  above  the  median  may  be  100  %  or 
more  of  the  median.  It  is  striking  to  note  that  the  deviations 
expressed  as  per  cents  of  the  median  for  the  total  amount  spent 
range  from  —30.6  %  to  +  80.2  %;  while  for  teaching  and 
supervision  the  range  is  from  —35.1  %  to  +  88.8  %.  Appar- 
ently the  amount  paid  per  child  for  teaching  and  supervision  is 
even  more  variable  than  the  total  amount  of  money  spent  per 
child.  Possibly  this  is  what  we  might  have  expected  when  we 
remember  that  teachers  of  some  sort  canTbe  had  for  almost  any 
salary,  while  some  of  the  other  commodities  or  utilities  which 
must  be  had  to  run  the  school  have  a  much  more  definite  market 
value.  The  great  range  for  supervision  from  —73.7%  to 
+  166  %  is  at  least  partially  to  be  accounted  for,  I  believe,  by 
the  fact  that  no  very  clear  distinction  exists  between  teachers 
and  supervisors  or  principals  in  some  systems.  Those  who 
should  have  been  reported  as  teachers  are,  doubtless,  in  some 
instances  reported  as  supervisors,  and  vice  versa. 

The  items  "janitors'  salaries,"  "text-books  and  supplies," 
and  "fuel"  furnish  the  best  opportunity  for  comparison  of 
variability.  The  medians  for  these  items  are  respectively  $1.90, 
$1.60,  and  $1.70.  The  range  of  deviations  for  janitors'  salaries 
is  from  —42.8  %  to  +  53.5  %  of  the  median;  for  text-books 
and  supplies,  from  —42.7%  to  +274%;    and  for  fuel,  from 

—  40.9  %  to  93.6  %.  That  the  smallest  proportional  plus  varia- 
tion should  be  found  in  the  item  of  janitors'  salaries,  and  the 
largest  for  the  item  of  text-books  and  supplies  seems  to  me  to 
indicate  that,  in  some  cities  at  least,  more  money  means  more 
of  those  things  which  make  possible  efficient  work  in  the  schools. 

The  deviations  for  the  item  of  repairs  show  a  range  of  from 

—  74. 8  %  to  +  196.6%  of  the  median.     There  would  probably 


TABLE  XXXIV 

Deviations  from  the  medians;  average  cost  per  pupil  for  two  years  (see  Table 
XXXII),  reduced  to  per  cents  of  the  medians.  The  figures  refer  to  per  cents  and 
tenths  of  per  cents. 


■u 

o 

•0  . 

bb 

i 

0} 
1 

a 

i 

6 

1 

1 

1 

CO 

i 

1 

J2  v 

CO  O, 

1 

1 

Medians. 

28.8 

20.5 

18.3 

2.2 

1.9 

1.6 

1.7 

1.1 

5- 

20.5 

23.9 

34.4 

—  64.5 

21.4 

0 

40.9 

-65.5 

6. 

—  9.7 

—  9.3 

—  4.9 

—  46.1 

-16.1 

6.1 

—  11.7 

56.1 

8. 

10.4 

12.2 

10.9 

23.1 

0 

18.3 

5.8 

9.4 

13. 

10.8 

13.7 

.6 

124.0 

5.4 

6.1 

23.4 

—  28.1 

14. 

0 

—  3.9 

-  .6 

-36.9 

10.7 

0 

46.8 

56.1 

15. 

—  11.5 

-9.3 

—  10.4 

0 

-16.1 

0 

-5.8 

-37.4 

16. 

—  1.4 

4.4 

4.9 

0 

0 

0 

0 

—  9.4 

20. 

—  19.8 

—  15.6 

-9.3 

—  73.7 

—  32.1 

-36.6 

23.4 

—  37.4 

27. 

—  9.4 

-11.7 

—  19.1 

50.7 

5.4 

0 

—  46.8 

—  18.7 

28. 

3.5 

1.5 

7.1 

—  46.1 

16.1 

—  36.6 

29. 

—  5.9 

-13.2 

-7.1 

—  64.5 

10.7 

18.3 

-11.7 

18.7 

30. 

32.0 

30.2 

39.9 

—  55.3 

26.7 

0 

196.6 

31. 

2.1 

7.8 

—  1.1 

—  64.5 

5.4 

93.6 

112.2 

32. 

8.3 

-1.0 

-5.5 

36.9 

5.4 

—  42.7 

17.6 

121.6 

34. 

17.0 

22.9 

18.6 

-32.3 

69.5 

40.9 

0 

35- 

-5.6 

1.9 

8.2 

—  50.7 

—  16.1 

-5.8 

0 

36. 

10.4 

24.4 

9.3 

148.0 

—  37.4 

5.8 

-65.5 

37. 

-30.6 

—  25.9 

—  35.5 

59.9 

—  42.8 

-17.6 

-37.4 

39- 

5.6 

9.8 

3.3 

64.5 

—  10.7 

17.6 

18.7 

40. 

14.6 

9.3 

2.7 

59.9 

—  32.1 

24.4 

46.8 

9.4 

41. 

—  13.2 

-14.6 

-17.0 

4.6 

—  37.4 

—  12.2 

0 

—  56.1 

42. 

0 

—  16.6 

-14.8 

106.0 

—  21.4 

61.0 

—  11.7 

—  18.7 

43- 

-1.7 

0 

6.6 

—  55.3 

0 

—  42.7 

0 

—  28.1 

8 

0 

0 

5.5 

—  41.5 

—  16.1 

6.1 

—  29.2 

56.1 

—  12.2 

-14.1 

—  20.8 

41.5 

-21.4 

0 

—  11.7 

-37.4 

52. 

-3.8 

—  15.2 

—  14.8 

23.1 

10.7 

18.3 

—  35.1 

149.0 

54- 

78.8 

64.9 

52.5 

166.0 

53.5 

274.3 

35.1 

-74.8 

55- 

—  26.4 

-35.1 

—  33.3 

—  59.9 

—  42.8 

—  30.5 

-40.9 

-65.5 

56. 

2.4 

2.9 

1.1 

36.9 

32.1 

-30.5 

—  17.6 

18.7 

57- 

80.2 

88.8 

83.6 

134.0 

42.8 

104.0 

17.6 

102.8 

76 


TABLE  XXXV 

Deviations  from  the  medians;  average  for  two  years  of  per  cent,  of  total  which 
each  item  is  (see  Table  XXXIII),  reduced  to  per  cents  of  the  medians.  The  figures 
refer  to  per  cents  and  tenths  of  per  cents. 


!>. 

c" 

to 

•1 

O 

it 

i 

a 

18 

tjfl'tfl 

81 

(30 

1 

1 

.2 

1 

a. 

3 

-3 

"(A 

! 

1 

i 

S 
& 
(4 

§ 

H^ 

C/2 

9 

rV 

£ 

P 

Medians. 

70.7 

63.1 

8.0 

6.1 

5.7 

5.9 

3.5 

5- 

6.6 

16.1 

—  72.5 

9.8 

-8.8 

20.3 

-74.3 

6. 

.4 

5.7 

—  45.0 

—  1.6 

15.8 

1.7 

85.8 

8. 

2.5 

1.4 

5.0 

—  1.6 

5.3 

-3.4 

2.9 

13. 

3.0 

-5.9 

92.5 

3.3 

-7.0 

11.8 

-28.6 

14. 

—  3.2 

.5 

—  38.8 

21.4 

—  1.8 

37.3 

68.6 

15. 

5.7 

4.3 

11.2 

3.3 

17.6 

5.1 

—  20.1 

16. 

6.8 

7.6 

-5.0 

8.2 

-1.8 

3.4 

0 

20. 

5.5 

14.4 

-67.7 

—  13.2 

—  22.8 

45.8 

-14.3 

27. 

—  3.7 

—  11.4 

57.7 

24.6 

22.8 

-40.7 

2.9 

28. 

—  1.4 

4.3 

—  51.2 

16.4 

—  40.4 

29. 

-7.1 

—  .5 

—  62.5 

26.3 

21.1 

-5.1 

—  40.1 

30. 

—  .3 

7.4 

—  67.7 

3.3 

—  22.0 

137.2 

31. 

—  9.5 

—  3.0 

—  66.2 

8.2 

89.8 

122.7 

32- 

—  6.5 

—  13.9 

26.2 

4.9 

—  50.9 

6.8 

102.8 

34. 

-3.0 

1.7 

—  45.0 

54.1 

11.9 

-5.7 

35- 

8.5 

15.5 

—  52.5 

-6.6 

-94.8 

0 

8.6 

36. 

14.3 

—  .8 

115.0 

—  41.0 

—  87.8 

-1.7 

-65.7 

37- 

7.8 

—  6.2 

115.0 

—  14.8 

17.0 

-2.9 

39. 

4.5 

—  1.6 

48.7 

—  11.5 

10.2 

17.2 

40. 

-3.7 

—  9.7 

38.8 

—  37.7 

7.0 

23.7 

2.9 

41. 

—  .9 

—  3.5 

13.7 

—  26.2 

—  1.8 

13.6 

—  48.6 

42. 

-1.3 

—  14.3 

96.2 

—  14.8 

59.7 

—  13.6 

—  11.5 

43- 

1.8 

8.9 

-58.7 

4.9 

—  42.2 

0 

—  22.9 

45- 

.7 

6.0 

-46.2 

—  9.9 

7.0 

-33.9 

68.6 

48. 

—  3.1 

—  9.0 

51.2 

—  6.6 

10.6 

—  5.1 

—  22.9 

52. 

—  11.7 

—  10.9 

-23.7 

4.9 

28.1 

—  39.0 

179.8 

54- 

—  7.5 

—  14.4 

41.2 

-11.5 

132.6 

—  18.8 

0 

55- 

—  2.1 

2.1 

—  40.0 

-8.2 

1.8 

—  13.6 

—  42.9 

56. 

.7 

-3.5 

28.7 

36.1 

—  33.3 

—  25.4 

25.7 

57. 

5.4 

2.7 

21.2 

—  16.4 

-33.9 

20.1 

77 


78  City  School  Expenditures 

be  less  variability  in  this  item  if  we  had  the  figures  for  a  period 
of  five  or  ten  years,  instead  of  only  two  years'  figures. 

Table  XXXV,  which  gives  the  deviations  from  the  medians 
on  the  per  cent,  basis  (the  average  for  two  years,  see  Table 
XXXIII)  reduced  to  per  cent,  of  the  median,  offers  another 
interesting  view  of  the  variability.  When  we  ask  how  a  city 
spends  its  money  regardless  of  the  amount  of  money  which  it 
has  to  spend,  we  are  dealing  with  the  problem  which  every 
administrator  of  schools  must  face.  From  a  median  of  70.7  % 
spent  for  teaching  and  supervision,  we  find  that  the  variations 
range  from  —  11. 7  %  to  +  14.3  %  of  that  proportion,  while  the 
deviations  for  teaching  alone  amount  to  from  — 14.4%  to 
+  1 6. 1  %.  In  these,  and  in  the  other  items  given  in  this  table, 
we  find  a  smaller  range  than  is  found  for  the  same  items  on  the 
cost  per  pupil  basis.  This  means,  of  course,  that  amount  of 
money  per  pupil  available  for  maintenance  and  operation  of 
schools  varies  much  more  than  does  the  proportional  distribu- 
tion of  that  money. 

On  the  basis  used  in  this  table,  as  well  as  on  the  cost  per 
pupil  basis,  we  find  that  the  range  above  the  median  is  less  for 
janitors'  salaries  than  for  fuel  or  text-books  and  supplies — that 
of  the  three,  text-books  and  supplies  show  the  greatest  range. 
The  range  for  janitors'  salaries  is  from  —  41  %  to  +  54.1  %  of 
the  median;  for  fuel,  from  — 40.7  %  to  +  89.8  %;  for  text- 
books and  supplies,  from  — 94.8  %  to  +  131.6  %.  In  a  later 
section,  where  the  relationship  of  these  items  to  the  total  is 
worked  out  exactly,  the  item  of  text-books  and  supplies  is 
shown  to  be  more  closely  correlated  with  the  total  amount 
spent  than  are  either  of  the  other  items. 

As  a  conclusion  to  the  discussion  of  variability,  it  may  not 
be  out  of  place  to  suggest  certain  limits  within  which,  in  my 
judgment,  the  cost  per  pupil  or  per  cent,  of  total  amount  spent 
for  each  item  should  lie.  Allowing  for  some  difference  in  the 
cost  of  living,  it  seems  to  me  that  the  superintendent  of  schools 
in  any  city  spending  less  than  $30  per  pupil  for  the  maintenance 
and  operation  of  schools,  should  investigate  in  order  to  find  out 
whether  the  schools  are  getting  their  just  proportion  of  the 
money  spent  by  the  city.  This  amount  seems  small  when  com- 
pared with  the  rates  of  tuition  charged  to  day  pupils  in  our  best 
private  schools,  where  the  tuition  even  in  the  lower  grades  is 


'  N  i  V  t  n  s?  i  i  ■     | 

City  School  E^iM^^  79 

commonly  $100  to  $200  per  year.  It  is  difficult  to  place  the 
upper  limit  for  the  total  cost  per  pupil,  except  by  saying  that 
the  expenditure  should  be  increased  to  such  an  extent  that  the 
public  schools  shall  be  able  to  do  as  efficient  work  as  our  best 
private  schools.  When  we  compare  the  meagre  provision  which 
was  made  for  public  education  fifty  years  ago  with  an  expendi- 
ture of  $54  per  pupil  reported  by  one  of  the  cities  with  which 
this  study  deals,  we  are  inclined  to  feel  hopeful  for  the  future. 
If  the  superintendent  of  schools,  or  other  school  officer,  has  seen 
to  it  that  as  much  money  as  possible  is  provided  for  the  public 
schools,  his  next  problem  is  to  apportion  the  money  secured 
among  the  several  items  of  the  budget  to  the  best  possible  ad- 
vantage. From  the  data  given  above,  it  is  my  judgment  that 
an  ideal  budget  would  give  to  each  of  the  principal  items  not 
less  than  the  first  proportion  mentioned  in  the  table  below,  nor 
more  than  that  indicated  by  the  last  figure,  except  that  cities 
spending  an  unusually  large  amount  per  pupil  should,  I  believe, 
spend  a  relatively  larger  proportion  for  teaching  and  super- 
vision, and  for  text-books  and  supplies;  while  the  proportion 
spent  for  fuel,  repairs,  and  janitors'  salaries  should  increase 
much  more  slowly. 

TABLE  XXXVI 

%  of  Total.      %  of  Total. 

Teaching  and  Supervision  from  70  %     to     75  % 
Supervision  alone 
Teaching  alone 

Janitors'  Salaries 

Text-Books  and  Supplies 

Fuel 

Repairs 

Teaching  and  supervision  are  the  most  important  factors  in 
an  effective  school  system  and  should,  in  my  opinion,  receive  a 
greater  rather  than  a  smaller  proportion  than  that  usually  given. 
The  limits  given  for  supervision  are  high  rather  than  low,  I 
think.  There  is  a  tendency  to-day,  I  believe,  to  differentiate 
the  work  of  the  supervisor  of  instruction  from  that  of  the  class 
teacher  on  the  one  hand,  and,  on  the  other,  from  the  mere 
routine  work  of  the  assistant  who  keeps  the  office  records.  This 
means  that  a  competent  supervising  principal  can  do  the  work 
of  supervision  formerly  done  by  five  or  six  men ;  and  that  even 
though  he  receives  a  larger  salary  than  was  paid  any  one  of 
the  five  or  six  before,  the   proportion   paid   for  supervision, 


"       7  %      ' 

4    10% 

"     60%      ' 

'      68% 

"       5  %      ' 

'        7% 

"       4  %      ' 

'        6% 

5%      ' 

*        7% 

"       3  %      • 

*        5% 

80  City  School  Expenditures 

even  when  office  clerks'  salaries  are  included,  has  diminished. 
Janitors'  salaries,  fuel,  and  repairs  are  fixed  charges  upon  the 
school  revenue,  which  should  not  much  increase  in  proportion 
to  the  amount  per  pupil  available  for  school  purposes. 

The  best  way  to  decide  just  what  is  the  best  way  to  appor- 
tion the  money  among  the  various  items  of  the  budget  would 
be  to  find  out  which  school  system  is  doing  the  best  work,  by 
testing  the  pupils  in  the  system,  and  then  to  adopt  as  the  ideal 
apportionment  that  distribution  of  moneys  which  is  found  in 
the  most  efficient  school  systems.  I  hope  that  some  one  will 
be  able  to  make  such  tests  within  the  next  year  for  the  cities 
from  which  the  data  were  secured  for  this  study. 

RELATIONSHIPS 

In  the  discussion  of  variability  given  above,  it  was  suggested 
that  a  more  careful  study  of  the  data  given  would  enable  us  to 
measure  exactly  the  relationships  which  exist  among  the  various 
items  of  the  budget.  Such  questions  of  relationship  naturally 
suggest  themselves  when  one  considers  the  distribution  of  money 
for  different  purposes.  Do  cities  which  spend  a  large  total 
amount  per  pupil  spend  a  correspondingly  large  amount  for 
teaching?  As  the  amount  per  pupil  increases,  is  more  money 
spent  for  every  purpose,  or  are  there  certain  items  of  expense 
which  do  not  increase  in  proportion  to  the  increased  cost  per 
pupil?  What  is  the  relation  between  a  large  amount  of  money 
spent  for  supervision  and  the  amount  spent  for  text-books  and 
supplies,  fuel,  repairs,  etc.?  If  a  larger  proportion  than  usual  of 
the  money  available  for  school  purposes  is  spent  for  janitors' 
salaries,  what  effect  may  we  expect  this  to  have  upon  teachers' 
salaries?  These  and  many  other  similar  questions  can  be  an- 
swered by  determining  the  relationships  which  exist  among  the 
various  items  of  the  budget,  on  both  the  cost  per  pupil  and  per 
cent,  of  total  bases. 

From  the  tables  of  deviations  of  medians  given  above  (Tables 
XXVIII  to  XXXIII),  the  fact  that  relationships  exist  might, 
perhaps,  be  inferred,  but  no  one  could  from  such  large  tables 
of  details  infer  the  particular  relationships  which  do  actually 
exist.  It  is  just  here  that  the  Pearson  Coefficient  of  Correlation 
is  invaluable.  The  following  explanations,  adapted  from 
Thorndike's  Educational  Psychology  (page  26),  will  explain  the 


City  School  Expenditures  81 

meaning  of  the  coefficient  of  correlation  to  the  reader  not  already- 
familiar  with  its  use. 

"The  coefficient  of  correlation  is  a  simple  figure  so  calcu- 
lated from  the  several  records  as  to  give  the  degree  of  relation- 
ship between  any  two  items  which  will  best  account  for  all  the 
separate  cases  in  the  group.  In  other  words,  it  expresses  the 
degree  of  relationship  from  which  the  actual  cases  might  have 
arisen  with  least  improbability.  It  has  possible  values  from 
-f  ioo  per  cent,  through  o  to  —  ioo  per  cent." 

A  coefficient  of  correlation  of  +  ioo  %  between  two  items 
of  the  budget  (say  teachers'  salaries  and  text -books)  on  the  basis 
of  the  cost  per  pupil  would  indicate  that  the  city  which  spent 
the  most  for  teachers'  salaries,  spent  the  most  for  text-books; 
that  the  city  which  spent  the  least  for  teachers'  salaries,  spent 
the  least  for  text -books ;  that  if  the  cities  were  ranged  in  order 
according  to  the  amount  spent  for  teachers'  salaries,  and  then 
in  order  according  to  the  amount  spent  for  text-books,  the  two 
rankings  would  be  identical ;  that  the  position  of  any  city  with 
reference  to  the  others  for  one  item  will  be  the  same  for  the 
other  item  (both  being  reduced  to  terms  of  the  variabilities  of 
the  cost  per  pupil  as  units  to  allow  comparison). 

A  coefficient  of  —  ioo  %  would,  per  contra,  mean  that  the 
city  which  spent  most  for  one  item  would  spend  the  smallest 
amount  for  the  other,  that  any  degree  above  the  average  or 
median  in  the  one  would  be  accompanied  by  the  same  degree 
below  the  average  or  median  for  the  other,  and  vice  versa.  A 
coefficient  of  +  62  %  would  mean  that  (comparison  being  ren- 
dered fair  here,  as  always,  by  reduction  to  the  variabilities  as 
units)  any  given  station  for  one  item  would,  on  the  whole,  imply 
62  hundredths  of  that  station  for  the  other.  A  coefficient  of 
—  62  %  would,  of  course,  mean  that  any  position  above  the 
average  for  the  one  item  would,  on  the  whole,  involve  a  position 
below  the  average  for  the  other  item  equal  to  62  hundredths 
of  the  amount  the  first  was  above  the  average. 

Table  XXXVII  gives  the  coefficients  which  were  found  on 
the  cost  per  pupil  basis.  The  first  column  gives  the  corrected 
coefficient x  as  determined  from  the  coefficients  found  when  the 

1  This  correction  is  made  by  using  the  Spearman  formulae  for  the 
correction  of  the  Pearson  Coefficient.  See  American  Journal  of  Psychol- 
ogy for  January,  1904. 


TABLE  XXXVII 

Pearson  Coefficients  of  Correlation  calculated  on  the  cost  per 

pupil  BASIS. 

ii|lg2il«iils  ^ei   igrf 

£      o<~       «c  o    <«ft       o£*  '    o^e 

Total  Cost  per  Pupil  correlated 
with  Teaching  and  Super- 
vision  :. +  l,015I  +  .97     +.96     +.99       +.88 

Total  Cost  per  Pupil  correlated 

with  Janitors'  Salaries ......      +    .  716  +  .  66     +  .  70     +  .  56       +  .  73 

Total  Cost  per  Pupil  correlated 
with  Text-Books  and  Sup- 
plies. ..  . +    .955  +.85     +.85     +.67       +.64 

Total  Cost  per  Pupil  correlated 

with  Fuel +    .522*+. 45     +.50     +.34       +.40 

Total  Cost  per  Pupil  correlated 

withRepairs +.246  +.24     +.47     +.56       +.35 

Teaching  and  Supervision 
correlated  with  Janitors' 
Salaries +.746  +.64     +.63     +.44       +.53 

Teaching  correlated  with  Text- 
Books  and  Supplies +    .  737  +  .  63     +  .  76     +  .  35       +  .  65 

Supervision  correlated       with 

Text:Books  and  Supplies .  . .     +    .  869  +  .  69     +  .  57     +  .  51       +  .  27 

Supervision     correlated     with 

Repairs -    .128    -.14     +.18      -.09       +.07 

Supervision     correlated     with 

Teaching +.366  +.27     +.31     +.05       +.12 

Supervision     correlated     with 

Fuel +    .11     +.06     +.02     +.04       +.01 

Janitors'     Salaries     correlated 

withFuel +    .531   +.30     +.61      -.08       +.45 

Janitors'     Salaries     correlated 

withRepairs +.219  +.32     +.32     +.39       +.24 

Repairs  correlated  with  Fuel ..      +.147  +.12     +.21      -.001     +.20 


1  That  this  coefficient  as  corrected  gives  over  ioo  %  is  due  to  the  fact 
that  the  third  decimal  place  is  lacking  in  the  coefficients  from  which  the 
correction  was  made. 

a  The  item  "fuel"  as  reported  for  the  two  years  is  less  definite  than 
most  of  the  other  items,  because  fuel  bought,  or  at  least  fuel  paid  for, 
one  year  is  often  used  the  next  year;  consequently,  only  the  second 
method  given  by  Spearman  for  the  correction  of  the  Pearson  coefficient 
is  used.  This  method  is  based  on  the  fact  that  an  increase  in  the  num- 
ber of  measures  of  each  of  the  facts  originally  measured  increases  its 
accuracy. 


82 


City  School  Expenditures  83 

first  year's  figures  alone  were  used,  when  the  second  year's 
figures  alone  were  used,  and  when  the  average  for  the  two  years 
was  used  (see  columns  3,4,  and  2).  The  second  column  gives 
the  coefficients  derived  from  the  average  of  two  years'  figures; 
the  third,  the  coefficients  derived  from  the  first  year's  figures 
from  cities  reporting  two  years ;  the  fourth,  the  coefficients  de- 
rived from  the  second  year's  figures;  and  the  fifth,  the  co- 
efficients found  when  the  figures  for  the  fifty -eight  cities  reporting 
the  first  year  were  used. 

In  the  discussion  which  follows,  the  coefficients  referred  to 
are  always  the  corrected  coefficients,  unless  it  is  specifically 
stated  that  other  coefficients  are  meant.  I  believe  that  the 
corrected  coefficient  more  nearly  expresses  the  relationship  which 
actually  exists  among  the  various  items  correlated  than  does 
any  other  figure.1 

The  first  question  which. dut  coefficients  enable  us  to  answer 
concerns  the  relationship  of  the  total  cost  per  pupil  to  the  prin^ 
cipal  items  of  the  budget.  Does  an  increased  cost  per  pupil 
mean  a  proportionate  increase  in  the  amount  spent  for  teaching 
and  supervision,  for  janitors'  salaries,  for  text-books  and  sup- 
plies, for  fuel,  and  for  repairs;  or  is  the  relationship  between 
the  total  cost  per  pupil  and  the  various  items  of  the  budget 
closer  for  some  than  for  others  ?  Examining  our  coefficients  we 
find  that  the  relationship  between  the  total  cost  per  pupil  and 
the  cost  for  teaching  and  supervision  is  expressed  by  a  coefficient 
of  +  100  %  (see  explanation  under  Table  XXVII),  i.  e.}  the 
amount  spent  for  teaching  and  supervision  is  determined  by 
the  total  amount  spent  per  pupil.  _  If  a  small  total  amount  per 

•  The  true  relationship  between  any  two  items  in  the  budget  for  these 
cities  is  the  relationship  which  would  be  found  if  we  had  perfect  measures 
of  the  cities'  tendencies  to  spend  money  for  school;  such,  for  instance,  as 
their  budgets  for  forty  or  fifty  years.  The  effect  of  chance  deviations  of 
any  single  year  from  the  cities'  general  tendencies  is  to  bring  the  calcu- 
lated correlation  from  its  true  value  toward  zero.  By  the  Spearman 
formulae  we  estimate  the  true  relationship  (1)  from  the  obtained  relation- 
ship and  the  amount  of  deviation  of  one  year's  budget  from  another 
year's,  or  (2)  from  the  difference  between  the  relationship  obtained  from 
one  year's  budget  and  that  from  two  or  more  years'  budgets.  For  the 
theory  of  the  correction  see,  in  general,  Thorndike,  Mental  and  Social 
Measurements,  pp.  128  and  129,  and  in  detail  C.  Spearman,  on  "The 
Proof  and  Measurement  of  Association  between  Two  Things,"  American 
Journal  of  Psychology,  January,  1904. 


84  City  School  Expenditures 

pupil  is  spent,  we  may  expect  a  correspondingly  small  amount 
per  pupil  for  teaching  and  supervision;  if  a  large  total  amount  per 
pupil  is  spent,  we  may  expect  a  correspondingly  large  amount 
per  pupil  for  teaching  and  supervision ;  if  the  cities  were  ranked 
in  order  on  the  basis  of  total  amount  spent  per  pupil,  and  then 
in  order  on  the  basis  of  the  amount  spent  per  pupil  for  teaching 
and  supervision,  we  would  expect  to  find  that  the  rank  of  the 
cities  would  be  the  same  for  each  item.  The  next  closest  rela- 
tionship is  that  for  text-books  and  supplies,  which  gives  a  co- 
efficient of  +  .955.  The  others  are,  in  order,  janitors'  salaries, 
+  .716;  fuel,  +.522;  and  repairs,  +  .246.  In  general,  these  re- 
lationships show  that  the  amount  spent  per  pupil  for  teaching 
and  supervision,  and  for  text-books  and  supplies,  corresponds 
very  closely  to  the  total  amount  spent  per  pupil ;  if  the  cost  per 
pupil  is  above  the  average,  we  may  expect  that  the  amount 
spent  per  pupil  will  be  high  for  these  items,  and  any  diminution 
in  the  total  amount  spent  per  pupil  is  likely  to  be  accompanied 
by  a  smaller  expenditure  per  pupil  for  these  purposes. 

The  coefficients  found  for  janitors'  salaries  and  fuel  show 
a  less  close  correspondence.  From  the  relationship  here  we  may 
infer  that  the  rank  of  any  city  above  or  below  the  median  in 
total  cost  per  pupil  might  be  compatible  with  various  ranks 
for  janitors'  salaries  or  fuel,  which  would  tend  to  be  approxi- 
mately three  fourths  of  the  rank  in  total  cost  per  pupil. 

The  item  of  repairs  is  least  closely  related  with  the  total  cost 
per  pupil.  This  is  as  we  might  have  expected.  The  fact  that 
a  school  system  is  expensive  does  not  increase  the  cost  of  re- 
pairing the  buildings,  except  in  so  far  as  the  labor  necessary  to 
do  the  work  may  cost  more  in  those  cities  which  are  able  to 
spend  the  large  amount  per  pupil.  We  might  expect  the  ex- 
pensive city  to  keep  its  buildings  in  better  repair  than  the  poorer 
cities,  which,  with  the  difference  in  the  cost  of  labor  mentioned 
above,  would  seem  to  account  for  the  coefficient  of  +.246. 

The  fact  that  we  find  a  direct  relationship  between  the  total 
cost  per  pupil  and  the  cost  per  pupil  for  each  of  the  principal 
items  of  expenditure  makes  it  clear  that,  in  general,  an  expen- 
sive school  system  is  expensive  because  it  spends  more  money 
for  everything,  and  that  an  inexpensive  school  system  is  one 
that  retrenches  all  along  the  line.  However,  the  fact  that  cer- 
tain of  the  items  are  less  closely  related  to  the  total  cost  per 


City  School  Expenditures 


85 


pupil  than  others  does  indicate  that  these  items  will  probably 
not  be  found  to  increase  or  decrease  in  a  proportion  equal  to 
that  of  the  items  showing  a  closer  relationship,  nor  in  propor- 
tion to  the  increase  in  the  total  cost  per  pupil. 

Table  XXXVIII  shows  just  how  an  increased  or  a  decreased 
total  cost  per  pupil  affects  the  principal  items  of  the  budget. 
The  figures  given  refer  to  dollars,  and  are  calculated  from  the 
average  amount  spent  for  each  item  for  two  years.  The  data 
are  from  thirty  cities  reporting  for  the  school  years  1 902-1 903 
and  1 903-1 904. 

TABLE  XXXVIII 


I 

I 

to 

3 
3 

I 

Average  for  the  five 
cities  nearest  the 
median $29.00 

First  group  of  five 
cities  above  the  me- 
dian group 31.00 

Second   group   of   five 

cities.... 34.10 

The  two  cities  having 
the  greatest  expense 
per  pupil 51.70 

Average  for  the  five 
cities  nearest  the  me- 
dian       29.00 

First  group  of  five 
cities  below  the  me- 
dian      27.70 

Second   group   of   five 

cities 25.50 

The  three  cities  having 
the  smallest  expense 
per  pupil 20.80 


•3  3 


I 
II 


u  w 

II 

(A  w 


if 


$17.80  $2.20  $20.00  $1.90  $1.80  $1.90 

19.20  3.20  22.40  1.80  1.30  1.90 

21.80  2.30  24.10  2.20  1.80  2.20 

30.80  5.40  36.20  2.80  4.80  2.20 

17.80  2.20  20.00  1.90  1.80  1.90 

18.20  1.30  19.50  1.90  1.60  1.50 

15.70  2.40  18.10  1.50  1.60  1.40 

13.60  1.60  15.20  1.10  1.10  1.50 


EXPLANATION  OF  TABLE  XXXVIII 

The  first  line  of  the  table  gives  the  average  total  cost  per  pupil  and  the 
average  amount  spent  for  each  of  the  principal  items  of  the  budget,  for 
the  five  cities  which  have  a  total  cost  per  pupil  nearest  the  median  total 
cost  per  pupil.  The  next  line  gives  the  same  information  for  the  group 
of  five  cities  having  the  next  highest  total  cost  per  pupil.     The  next  two 


86  City  School  Expenditures 

lines  are  explained  in  like  manner.  The  fifth  line  repeats  the  first  line. 
The  sixth  line  gives  the  average  total  cost  per  pupil  and  the  average  ex- 
penditure for  the  several  items  of  expenditure  for  the  five  cities  which 
have  the  next  lowest  total  cost  per  pupil  below  the  median  group.  The 
next  two  lines  are  explained  in  like  manner. 

From  this  table  (XXXVIII)  the  relationships  already  shown 
by  the  coefficients  of  correlation  given  in  Table  XXXVII  are 
made  clear.  In  general,  the  table  shows  that  an  increased  cost 
per  pupil  means  an  increased  expenditure  for  each  item,  and 
that  a  decreased  total  cost  per  pupil  is  accompanied  by  a  de- 
crease in  the  amount  spent  per  pupil  for  everything.  An  in- 
crease of  two  dollars  in  the  total  cost  per  pupil  (see  line  2)  is 
accompanied  by  an  increase  of  $2.40  per  pupil  in  amount  spent 
for  teaching  and  supervision,  and  a  decrease  in  janitors'  sal- 
aries, text-books  and  supplies,  and  repairs,  while  fuel  remains 
the  same.  In  the  next  group,  however,  with  an  increase  in 
total  cost  per  pupil  above  the  median  group  of  $5.10,  teaching 
and  supervision  show  an  increase  of  $4.10,  janitors'  salaries  and 
fuel  show  an  increase  of  thirty  cents  each,  text-books  and  sup- 
plies remain  the  same,  and  repairs  decrease  thirty  cents  per 
pupil.  The  next  group,  with  an  increased  total  cost  per  pupil 
of  $22.70,  gives  an  increase  for  teaching  and  supervision  of 
$16.20,  an  increase  for  janitors'  salaries  of  ninety  cents,  an  in- 
crease for  text-books  and  supplies  of  $3,  an  increase  for  fuel 
of  thirty  cents,  and  an  increase  for  repairs  of  forty  cents  per 
pupil. 

By  examining  the  part  of  the  table  giving  the  expenditures 
for  groups  of  cities  spending  less  than  the  median  group,  we 
find  the  decrease  in  all  items  more  constant  than  was  the  in- 
crease for  the  cities  spending  more  than  was  spent  by  the  median 
group.  The  very  fact  that  the  city  spends  less  than  the  average 
probably  means  that  it  would  be  very  difficult  to  keep  the  ex- 
penditure in  any  one  item  up  to  the  average  without  eliminating 
other  necessary  expenditures.  On  the  other  hand,  a  city  spend- 
ing more  than  the  average  can  put  the  additional  money  in  any 
place  where  the  demand,  of  one  kind  or  another,  may  be 
strongest. 

Let  us  return  again  to  a  consideration  of  the  relationships 
given  in  Table  XXXVII.  The  relationship  (+  .746)  between 
teaching  and  supervision  and  janitors'  salaries  tends  to  confirm 


City  School  Expenditures  87 

the  observation  made  above  with  reference  to  the  relation  be- 
tween these  items  and  the  total  cost  per  pupil.  We  may  not 
expect  janitors'  salaries  to  correspond  so  closely  to  the  total  cost 
per  pupil  as  do  teachers'  salaries.  Apparently  there  are  causes 
other  than  those  (the  cost  per  pupil  of  teaching  and  supervision) 
which  influence  the  amount  per  pupil  spent  for  janitors'  salaries. 

The  coefficients  for  teaching  and  for  supervision  with  text- 
books and  supplies  (+.737  and  +.869,  respectively),  indicate  a 
closer  relationship  between  the  cost  per  pupil  for  supervision 
and  for  text-books  and  supplies  than  exists  between  the  cost  per 
pupil  for  teaching  and  for  text -books  and  supplies. 

That  the  relationship  between  supervision  and  repairs  is 
negative  (—.128)  might  seem  to  imply  that  high-priced  super- 
vision means  better  care  of  buildings.  The  coefficient  of  super- 
vision correlated  with  teachers'  salaries  is  +  .366.  This  is  rather 
smaller  than  one  might  have  expected.  It  is  rather  natural  to 
suppose  that  high-priced  supervisors  would  want  high-priced 
teachers,  and  that  a  city  spending  a  large  amount  per  pupil  for 
teachers  would  spend  a  correspondingly  large  amount  for  super- 
vision. The  small  coefficient  found  for  supervision  correlated 
with  fuel  (+.11),  seems  to  indicate  that  while  greater  expense 
for  supervisors  increases  the  amount  spent  for  text-books  and 
supplies  (see  coefficient  for  supervision  with  text-books  and 
supplies),  it  has  little  in  common  with  the  expense  for  fuel. 

The  relationship  between  janitors'  salaries  and  fuel,  and 
janitors'  salaries  and  repairs,  is  expressed  by  coefficients  of 
+  .531  and  +.219,  respectively.  It  will  be  remembered  that 
fuel  is  more  closely  correlated  with  the  total  cost  per  pupil  than 
is  janitors'  salaries.  This  being  true,  it  would  seem  that  the 
correspondence  between  janitors'  salaries  and  fuel  might  be 
accounted  for  by  the  fact  that  they  are  both  determined  largely 
by  the  total  amount  spent  per  pupil.  It  was  found  also  that 
supervision  and  repairs  show  a  negative  relationship,  and  here 
we  find  a  positive  relationship  between  janitors'  salaries  and 
repairs  nearly  equal  to  the  relationship  between  repairs  and  the 
total  cost  per  pupil.  Apparently  costly  supervision  means 
more  for  economy  in  repairs  than  does  a  large  amount  per  pupil 
spent  for  janitors'  salaries. 

The  next  table  (No.  XXXIX)  gives  the  coefficients  which 
were  calculated  on  the  "per  cent,  of  total"  basis. 


88  City  School  Expenditures 

These  coefficients  show  what  effect  the  spending  of  a  certain 
proportion  of  the  money  available  for  one  item  has  on  the  pro- 
portion spent  for  other  items. 

TABLE  XXXIX 

Pearson  Coefficients  of  Correlation  calculated  on  the  per  cent. 

of  total  basis. 


!    I  111  iiili  i  fill  if 


Teaching      and      Supervision 

correlated     with     Janitors' 

Salaries -.356     -.30     -.25       -.43     -.48 

Teaching  correlated  with  Text- 
Books  and  Supplies -  .  746     -  .  46     -  .  09       -  .  59     -  .  12 

Janitors'     Salaries     correlated 

with  Fuel -.024     -.03     +.12       -.33     +.26 

Janitors'     Salaries    correlated 

with  Repairs +.155     +.17     +.12       +.48     +.13 

Supervision     correlated     with 

Text-Books  and  Supplies ...  +  .  203  +  .  17  +  .  17  +  .  27  +  .  01 
Supervision     correlated     with 

Repairs < -.409     -.28     -.06       -.38     +.03 

Supervision     correlated     with 

Teaching -  .  983     -  .  68     -  .  54       -  .  69     -  .  67 

Supervision     correlated     with 

Fuel -.333      -.20      -.17        -.03      -.02 

Repairs  correlated  with  Fuel . .     +  .  195     -  .  03     +  .  003     +  .  12     +  .  23 

In  this  table  (XXXIX)  the  significant  thing  is  not  so  much 
the  size  of  the  positive  or  negative  coefficients  as  the  order,  the 
relative  closeness  of  relationship  or  opposition  among  the  various 
items.  Rearranging  the  table  on  this  basis  and  calling  the 
median  relationship  zero,  and  transmuting  the  others  on  this 
basis,  the  following  table  is  derived: 

Transmuted 
Coefficients. 

Supervision  correlated  with  Teaching —  .  983  —  .  650 

Teaching                 "           "    Text-Books  and  Supplies  .  .  -.746  -.413 

Supervision            "           "     Repairs —  .  409  —  .  076 

Teaching    and    Supervision    correlated    with    Janitors' 

Salaries -.356  -.023 

Supervision  correlated  with  Fuel —  .  333           0 

Janitors'  Salaries  correlated  with  Fuel —  .  024  +  .  309 

"    Repairs +.155  +.488 

Repairs  correlated  with  Fuel +  .  195  +  .  528 

Supervision  correlated  with  Text-Books  and  Supplies  . .  +  .  203  +  •  536 


City  School  Expenditures  89 

I  believe  that  the  transmuted  coefficients  more  nearly  ex- 
press the  true  relationship  than  do  those  originally  found,  for 
we  must  have  expected  a  negative  relationship  between  any 
two  items,  because  a  larger  proportion  than  usual  spent  for  one 
item  leaves  a  smaller  proportion  of  the  total  to  be  divided 
among  the  other  items  of  the  budget.  So  far  as  the  coefficients 
obtained  enable  us  to  judge,  this  negative  relationship,  due 
simply  to  the  fact  that  a  larger  proportion  of  money  than  usual 
spent  for  any  one  item  leaves  a  smaller  proportion  for  other 
items,  is  approximately  the  relationship  half-way  between  the 
extremes, — the  relationship  between  supervision  and  fuel, 
—  .333.  If  we  call  this  relationship  zero,  the  transmuted  rela- 
tionships give  us,  as  nearly  as  we  can  obtain  them,  the  relation- 
ships between  the  other  items  freed  from  this  constant  error. 

Let  us  consider  the  transmuted  coefficients.  Suppose  a  city 
spends  more  than  the  usual  proportion  for  supervision,  what 
other  items  may  we  expect  to  find  receiving  an  unusual  propor- 
tion of  the  money  spent?  The  coefficient  of  +  .536  between 
supervision  and  text-books  and  supplies  indicates  that  the 
probability  is  that  a  city  which  spends  a  large  proportion  for 
one  of  these  items  will  spend  a  large  proportion  for  the 
other, — that  we  may  expect  to  find  some  cities  unusual  both  in 
respect  to  the  proportion  spent  for  supervision  and  that  spent 
for  text-books  and  supplies.  The  positive  coefficients  between 
janitors'  salaries,  fuel,  and  repairs,  no  matter  which  two  are 
taken  together,  shows  that  in  cities  where  one  of  these  items  is 
proportionately  large,  the  others  will  probably  receive  more 
than  the  usual  proportion.  Comparing  these  coefficients  with 
those  found  for  teaching  and  supervision  with  janitors'  salaries 
and  supervision  with  fuel,  it  is  suggested  that  some  boards  of 
education  are  interested  particularly  in  the  physical  side — the 
buildings,  their  care,  etc., — and  that  this  over-emphasis  on  this 
side  means  less  money  for  the  purely  educational  activities. 
The  very  large  negative  coefficient  for  supervision  correlated 
with  teachers'  salaries  would  doubtless  be  reduced  if  more 
accurate  reports  of  the  amounts  spent  for  each  of  these  items 
were  available.  It  is  in  this  relationship  between  the  two  items 
that  any  mistakes  in  reporting  in  either  an  amount  which  really 
belonged  to  the  other  would  be  most  apparent.  Any  amount 
reported  as  teaching  which  should  have  been  given  as  supervi- 


90  City  School  Expenditures 

sion  would  make  the  amount  for  teaching  too  large  and  the 
amount  for  supervision  too  small,  and  the  opposite  would  be 
true  if  an  amount  which  should  have  been  reported  as  teaching 
were  given  as  supervision.  In  either  case,  such  mistakes  would 
make  this  particular  coefficient  show  a  more  pronounced  negative 
relationship  than  actually  exists.  Such  mistakes  would  not, 
however,  have  a  like  effect  on  other  coefficients,  where  the  in- 
crease or  decrease  in  the  item  of  supervision  or  teaching  has  no 
effect  on  the  other  item  correlated.  The  fact  that  the  amounts 
given  for  teaching  or  supervision  may  in  one  case  be  slightly  too 
large  and  in  another  slightly  too  small,  means  that,  except  when 
the  two  items  themselves  are  correlated,  the  mistake  in  one 
direction  would  be  offset  by  the  mistake  in  the  other. 

The  relationship  between  teachers'  salaries  and  text -books 
and  supplies  (—  .413)  is  particularly  interesting  when  con- 
trasted with  the  relationship  between  supervision  and  text- 
books and  supplies  (+.536).  If  a  city  spends  an  undue 
proportion  for  supervision  we  may  expect  that  an  unusually  large 
proportion  will  be  spent  for  text-books  and  supplies ;  while  the 
opposite  condition  holds  for  the  proportion  spent  for  teaching. 
Possibly  the  relationship  between  supervision  and  text-books 
and  supplies  is  simply  that  the  highly  paid  supervisors  are  able 
to  get  appropriations  for  books  and  supplies,  and  that  poorly 
paid  supervisors  do  not  have  the  ability  or  influence,  rather 
than  that  the  supervisors  have  much  to  do  with  the  actual  use 
or  waste  of  supplies  furnished.  On  the  other  hand,  if  there  is 
anything  that  a  good  teacher  wants,  it  is  plenty  of  books  and 
supplies  of  the  right  quality,  consequently  it  seems  strange  that 
there  should  be  this  opposition  in  the  relative  proportions  spent 
for  these  two  items.  However,  expensive  teachers  may  effect 
economy  by  the  proper  use  of  materials,  and  poorly  paid  teach- 
ers may  be  the  most  careless.  There  is  nothing  that  hurts  a 
book  so  little  as  using  it  properly,  and  it  is  conceivable  that 
the  best  teachers  may  actually  use  fewer  supplies  than  those 
with  less  ability. 

Table  XL  gives  the  correlation  of  the  first  and  second  years' 
figures  on  both  the  cost  per  pupil  and  per  cent,  of  total  bases. 
These  coefficients  give  us  some  idea  of  the  relative  stability  of 
the  various  items  of  the  budget.  They  are  used  also  in  making 
the  Spearman  correction. 


City  School  Expenditures  91 

TABLE  XL 

First  and  second  year's  figures  correlated.      Thirty  cities  reporting  for 
the  school  years  1902-03  and  1903-04.  ' 

I — Cost  per  Pupil  Basis 

Total  cost  per  pupil  correlated  with  total  cost  per  pupil + .  92 

Supervision  and  teaching  correlated  with  supervision  and  teaching  +  •  89 


Supervision 
Teachers'  salaries 
Janitors'  " 

Text-books  and  supplies 
Fuel 
Repairs 


supervision +  .  69 

teachers'  salaries +  .  79 

janitors'  "      +.90 

text-books  and  supplies..  +  .89 

fuel +.17 

repairs + .  34 


II — Per  Cent,  of  Total  Basis 

Supervision  and  teaching  correlated  with  supervision  and  teaching  +  .  56 

Supervision 

Teachers'  salaries 

Janitors'        " 

Text-books  and  supplies 

Fuel 

Repairs 


supervision +  .  58 

teachers'  salaries + .  51 

janitors'       M        +  .80 

text-books  and  supplies .  +  .  65 

fuel +.34 

repairs +  .  54 


The  total  cost  per  pupil  gives  a  coefficient  of  +  .92,  showing 
that  the  amount  per  child  spent  does  not  vary  much  from  year 
to  year, — the  expensive  city  remains  so,  and  the  city  spending 
little  does  not  suddenly  devote  a  much  larger  proportion  of  its 
revenues  for  schools.  Almost  as  constant  as  the  total  cost  per 
pupil  are  the  amounts  spent  for  janitors'  salaries,  text-books  and 
supplies,  teaching  and  supervision,  giving,  as  they  do,  coeffi- 
cients of  +.90,  +  .89,  +  .89,  respectively.  The  items  of  teach- 
ing and  supervision,  when  taken  alone,  show  greater  variation 
(coefficients  of  +  .79  and  +  .69,  respectively)  ,  due  largely  to  the 
fact  that,  in  reporting,  amounts  properly  belonging  to  one  item 
were  reported  under  the  other,  rather  than  in  a  change  of  policy 
as  to  the  relative  amount  to  be  allowed  for  teaching  and  for 
supervision. 

As  one  might  expect,  the  amount  spent  for  repairs  varies 
more  than  any  of  the  items  mentioned  above  (a  coefficient  of 
+  .34  was  found).  A  large  amount  spent  for  repairs  one  year 
means  a  smaller  amount  the  next  year,  rather  than  an  equally 
large  amount.  That  the  coefficient  for  fuel  is  as  low  as  +  .17, 
might  seem  to  indicate  that  fuel  in  excess  of  that  which  is  used 
is  often  bought  and  paid  for  out  of  a  single  year's  budget,  rather 


92  City  School  Expenditures 

than  that  there  is  any  very  great  difference  in  the  value  of  the 
fuel  actually  consumed  each  year. 

When  we  come  to  consider  the  proportion  of  the  total  which 
is  spent  for  any  one  item  for  two  successive  years,  we  find  the 
variability  rather  greater  than  for  the  amount  spent  per  pupil. 
This  is  due  to  the  fact  that,  while  the  amount  per  pupil  spent 
for  any  one  purpose  remains  fairly  constant,  any  additional  ex- 
penditure for  some  new  item  which  increases  the  gross  amount 
spent,  or  any  diminution  in  any  item  of  expenditure,  affects  the 
proportion  which  this  item  is  of  the  total  amount  spent.  It  is 
interesting  to  note  that  in  the  relative  constancy  with  which  a 
given  proportion  is  spent  for  any  item,  janitors'  salaries  lead, 
followed  by  text-books  and  supplies,  supervision,  teaching  and 
supervision,  repairs,  teaching,  and  fuel  (see  part  II  of  Table 
XL). 

Table  XLI  gives  the  coefficients  for  the  total  cost  per  pupil 
correlated  with  the  per  cent,  which  each  item  is  of  the  total. 
These  coefficients  tell  us  what  effect  a  larger  or  smaller  expendi- 
ture per  pupil  may  be  expected  to  have  on  the  proportion  which 
is  spent  for  any  one  item  of  the  budget. 

TABLE  XLI 
Pearson  Coefficients  of  Correlation 

The  total  cost  per  pupil  correlated  with  the  per  cent,  which  each  item 
is  of  the  total.  The  average  cost  per  pupil  and  per  cent,  of  total  for  two 
years  is  used  as  the  basis  of  calculation. 

Total  cost  per  pupil  correlated  with  per  cent,  of  total  spent  for: 

Teaching  and  Supervision —  .  05 

Janitors'  Salaries —  .  06 

Text-Books  and  Supplies -f- .  35 

Fuel -.22 

Repairs +  .  13 

Apparently  the  total  cost  per  pupil  may  not  be  expected  to 
affect  the  proportion  spent  for  teaching  and  supervision  and  for 
janitors'  salaries.  Cities  spending  a  large  amount  per  pupil  do 
not  necessarily  spend  any  greater  proportion  of  their  money  for 
these  purposes  than  do  cities  spending  a  smaller  amount  per 
child.  (The  coefficients  of  — .05  and  —.06  are  so  small  as  to 
be  practically  negligible.)     On  the  other  hand,  the  positive  co- 


City  School  Expenditures  93 

efficient  of  +  .35  for  text-books  and  supplies  indicates  that  there 
is  a  direct  relationship  between  the  total  amount  spent  per  pupil 
and  the  proportion  which  is  spent  for  this  purpose.  We  may- 
expect  an  expensive  city  to  spend  a  larger  proportion  of  its 
money  for  text-books  and  supplies  than  does  the  poorer  city, 
even  though  we  may  infer  from  this  coefficient  that  the  increase 
in  the  proportion  spent  for  this  purpose  will  not  be  proportion- 
ate to  the  increased  cost  per  pupil.  The  negative  coefficient  for 
fuel  shows  that  the  proportion  spent  for  fuel  decreases  as  the 
total  cost  per  pupil  increases.  The  most  expensive  city  will 
probably  spend  a  smaller  proportion  of  its  money  for  fuel  than 
a  poor  city.  That  the  proportion  spent  for  repairs  should  give 
a  positive  coefficient  of  +  .13  when  correlated  with  the  total 
cost  per  pupil  seems  to  indicate  that  there  is  some  tendency  for 
the  more  expensive  cities  to  spend  a  larger  proportion  for  re- 
pairs than  the  less  expensive  city — possibly  the  cities  spending 
the  greater  amount  per  pupil  do  keep  their  buildings  in  better 
repair. 

Table  XLII  gives  the  average  salary  received  by  elementary 
and  by  high  school  teachers,  and  the  average  daily  wage  re- 
ceived by  carpenters,  bricklayers,  and  day  laborers.  This  in- 
formation was  calculated  from  two  years'  data  for  the  thirty 
cities  reporting  for  the  school  years  1 902-1 903  and  1 903-1 904. 
The  figure  given  for  elementary  and  high  school  teachers'  sal- 
aries was  derived  by  finding  first  the  average  salary  paid  to 
each  class  of  teachers  for  each  year  separately  by  dividing  the 
gross  amount  spent  for  each  item  by  the  number  of  teachers 
(see  form  sent  to  superintendents),  and  then  the  average  for  the 
two  years  was  taken.  In  a  similar  mariner,  from  the  report 
given  by  city  superintendents  on  the  blank  filled  out  by  them, 
the  average  wage  of  carpenters,  bricklayers,  and  day  laborers 
was  calculated.  The  information  concerning  the  daily  wage  of 
carpenters,  bricklayers,  and  day  laborers  is  probably  less  exact 
than  we  might  wish,  but  sufficiently  accurate,  I  think,  to  show 
whether  or  not  any  relationship  exists  between  the  amounts 
paid  to  this  class  of  laborers  and  to  teachers.  It  is  for  the  pur- 
pose last  mentioned  that  these  data  are  given.  Coefficients  will 
be  given  to  show  what  relationship  exists  between  the  wages 
paid  carpenters,  bricklayers,  and  day  laborers  and  the  salaries 
paid  teachers. 


94  City  School  Expenditures 


TABLE 

XLII 

>> 
0 

1* 
"I 

Kg 

b 

9  so 

£ 

a  c 

CO   O 

L 

£8 

cc  rt 

OS 

m 
SP  • 

cd  xn 

13 

i 

B 

> 

»3 

be  t-< 

mm 

>  0 

U 

>  O 

<I 

< 

< 

< 

< 

5- 

$    955.5 

$643.1 







6. 

747.1 

407.5 

$2.50 

$3.25 

$1.75 

8. 

836.4 

691.6 

2.50 

4.00 

2.00 

13- 

930. 

540.8 

2.62 

3.75 

1.75 

14. 

820.8 

425.9 

3.00 

4.50 

2.00 

15- 

747.9 

528.2 

3.00 

4.00 

1.87 

16. 

770.5 

386.4 

3.12 

3.68 

1.50 

20. 

736.8 

537.2 

2.75 

4.00 

2.50 

27. 

563.3 

350.6 

— 

— 

— 

28. 

931.2 

460.4 

2.75 

3.50 

1.50 

29. 

760.9 

452.5 

2.50 

3.25 

1.75 

30- 

1,332.8 

574. 

3.50 

4.65 

2.25 

31- 

877.6 

373.6 

2.50 

3.50 

1.62 

32. 

801.8 

538.1 

3.25 

4.25 

2.00 

34- 

819.7 

513.2 

2.50 

3.00 

1.50 

35- 

702.8 

482.5 

3.00 

4.00 

1.50 

36. 

603.3 

487.5 

3.87 

3.50 

1.50 

37- 

657.1 

381.7 

2.90 

4.00 

1.85 

39- 

724.9 

418.1 

2.50 

3.25 

1.50 

40. 

732.9 

366.2 

2.50 

2.50 

1.50 

41. 

663.2 

429.1 

2.75 

4.50 

1.75 

42. 

776.5 

486.1 

2.62 

3.30 

1.50 

43. 

805.4 

499. 

2.60 

3.55 

1.75 

45- 

835.8 

504.1 

2.62 

4.00 

1.93 

48. 

558. 

415.2 

3.00 

3.75 

1.50 

52. 

876.7 

594.5 

2.85 

4.00 

1.50 

54- 

884.2 

557.5 

3.37 

4.25 

1.75 

55. 

645.8 

399.6 

2.75 

3.50 

1.50 

56. 

887.5 

557. 

3.50 

3.67 

2.45 

57- 

1,124.1 

662.7 

3.50 

4.70 

2.25 

Before  we  give  the  coefficients  showing  the  relationship  be- 
tween teachers'  salaries  and  the  wages  paid  carpenters,  brick- 
layers, and  day  laborers,  it  is  interesting  to  note  the  variability 
in  teachers'  salaries,  as  shown  by  the  table  given  above.  The 
average  salary  of  the  elementary  school  teachers  varies  from 
$350.60  in  city  No.  27  to  $691.30 — almost  twice  as  much — in 
city  No.  8.  The  average  salary  paid  high  school  teachers  varies 
from  $558  in  city  No.  48  to  $1332.80 — almost  two  and  a  half 
times  as  much — in  city  No.  30.  Whatever  we  may  believe 
about  the  difference  in  the  cost  of  living,  no  one  would  be  will- 
ing to  maintain  that  the  cost  of  living  in  one  of  the  cities  is 


City  School  Expenditures  95 

double  that  in  another  of  those  covered  by  this  study.  In  no 
case  does  the  highest  daily  wage  paid  a  carpenter,  bricklayer, 
or  day  laborer,  as  reported,  equal  double  that  paid  to  the  poor- 
est paid  laborer  in  any  one  of  these  occupations. 

TABLE  XLIII 

Pearson  Coefficients  of  Correlation 

Salaries  of  teachers  correlated  with  the  daily  wages  of  carpenters, 
bricklayers,  and  day  laborers.  The  average  salary  of  teachers  and  the 
average  daily  wage  for  two  years  are  used  as  the  basis  of  calculation. 

Elementary  Teachers'  Salaries  correlated  with: 

Carpenters'  Wages +  •  28 

Bricklayers'  Wages -j-  .  44 

Day  Laborers'  Wages -f-  .  57 

High  School  Teachers'  Salaries  correlated  with : 

Carpenters'  Wages + .  25 

Bricklayers'  Wages +  •  41 

Day  Laborers'  Wages +  •  57 

High  School  Teachers'  Salaries  correlated  with  Element- 

ary  Teachers  Salaries +  .  63 

The  coefficients  given  above  show  an  increased  direct  rela- 
tionship between  teachers'  salaries  and  the  daily  wages  paid 
artisans  and  day  laborers  as  we  go  from  carpenters,  to  brick- 
layers, to  day  laborers.  If  the  wages  paid  to  day  laborers  are 
an  index  of  the  cost  of  living,  we  may  infer  that  cost  of  living 
does  enter  as  a  determining  factor  in  the  amount  paid  to  teach- 
ers ;  not  that  the  amount  of  salary  paid  to  the  teacher  corres- 
ponds exactly  to  the  cost  of  living,  but  that  the  tendency  will 
be  for  cities  where  living  is  high  to  pay  rather  more  than  the 
average  salary,  and  for  cities  where  the  cost  of  living  is  below 
the  average,  to  pay  its  teachers  less  than  the  average. 

TABLE  XLIV 
Coefficients  of  correlation  calculated  on  the  cost  per  pupil  basis,  the 
figure  used  in   finding  the  cost  per  pupil  being  half-way  between  the 
average  number  of  pupils  in  daily  attendance  and  the  average  daily  en- 
rolment.    Forty-nine  cities,  reporting  for  the  year  1902-1903. 

Total  cost  per  pupil  correlated  with  Teaching  and  Supervision . .  + .  93 

"     Janitors'  Salaries -j-  .82 

44  Text- Books  and  Supplies  . .  +  .71 

Teaching  and  Supervision   "  "     Janitors'  Salaries 4-  .65 

Teaching                                "           "  Text-Books  and  Supplies  . .  +.66 

Supervision                            "           "  "            "           "         . .  +.34 

"     Repairs +  •  15 

44     Teaching +  .  15 

Janitors'  Salaries  44        •  4*     Fuel +  .45 

44     Repairs +  .40 


96  City  School  Expenditures 

If  these  coefficients  are  compared  with  those  given  for  the  first  year's 
figures  in  Table  XXXVII,  they  will  be  found  to  agree  in  the  main  with 
them.  Whatever  variation  is  found  is  due  largely  to  the  fact  that  on  the 
basis  on  which  this  table  is  computed,  nine  cities  had  to  be  omitted  be- 
cause they  did  not  furnish  the  necessary  data  for  the  average  daily 
enrolment. 

Table  XLV,  which  follows,  shows  the  relation  between  the 
proportion  of  pupils  attending  elementary  and  high  schools,  and 
the  proportion  of  the  total  amount  spent  for  salaries  which  is 
used  for  the  salaries  of  the  two  classes  of  teachers.  The  table 
also  gives  the  number  of  students  enrolled  per  teacher,  which 
offers  another  basis  for  comparison  as  between  elementary  and 
high  school  teachers.  The  number  of  pupils  as  given  in  this 
table  is  in  every  case  the  average  as  found  from  two  years'  total 
enrolment  figures.  In  determining  the  number  of  teachers,  and 
in  determining  the  amount  of  money  spent  for  each  group,  kin- 
dergarten teachers  and  teachers  of  special  subjects,  such  as 
nature  study,  manual  training,  etc.,  are  counted  as  elementary 
school  teachers. 

EXPLANATION  OF  TABLE  XLV 

The  first  column  gives  the  average  total  number  of  pupils  enrolled  in 
all  day  schools;  the  second,  the  number  enrolled  in  elementary  schools, 
including  kindergartens;  the  third,  the  number  enrolled  in  high  schools. 
The  fourth,  fifth,  and  sixth  columns  give  total  amount  spent  for  all  day 
school  teachers'  salaries,  the  amount  spent  for  elementary  school  teach- 
ers' salaries,  including  the  salaries  of  kindergarten  and  special  teachers, 
and  the  amount  spent  for  high  school  teachers'  salaries,  respectively. 
The  seventh  and  eighth  columns  give  the  per  cent,  of  the  total  number  of 
pupils  enrolled  who  are  enrolled  in  the  elementary  school,  and  the  per 
cent,  of  the  total  amount  spent  for  teachers'  salaries  which  is  spent  for 
the  salaries  of  elementary  school  teachers.  The  ninth  and  tenth  columns 
give  the  same  information  for  high  schools.  The  eleventh  and  twelfth 
columns  give  the  number  of  pupils  enrolled  per  teacher  in  both  ele- 
mentary and  high  schools. 

The  proportion  of  the  total  expenditures,  or  of  the  amount 
spent  for  salaries,  which  is  spent  for  the  teachers  of  one  class  or 
the  other  has  little  significance,  except  as  we  are  able  to  com- 
pare it  with  the  proportion  of  the  total  number  of  pupils  which 
are  enrolled  in  each  class  of  school.  That  a  city  spends  18  %  of 
the  total  amount  spent  for  maintenance  and  operation  for  high 
school  teachers'  salaries,  means  one  thing  when  the  city  enrolls 


City  School  Expenditures  97 

17  %  of  its  total  number  of  pupils  in  high  schools,  and  quite 
another  thing  when  the  city  enrolls  8.5  %  of  the  total  number 
in  high  schools. 

The  number  of  pupils  enrolled  in  the  elementary  schools 
varies  from  71  %  to  96  %  of  the  total  number  of  pupils  en- 
rolled, while  the  money  spent  for  the  salaries  of  elementary 
school  teachers  varies  from  56  %  to  91  %  of  the  total  amount 
spent  for  salaries  of  day  school  teachers.  The  median  for  ele- 
mentary teachers'  salaries  is  78.8  %  of  the  total  amount  spent 
for  salaries,  while  the  median  for  the  enrolment  in  elementary 
schools  is  90.1  %  of  the  total  enrolment  in  day  schools. 

For  high  schools  the  variability  for  the  proportion  of  total 
enrolment  has  a  range  of  from  4  %  to  29  %,  while  the  high 
school  teachers  receive  from  9  %  to  44  %  of  the  money  devoted 
to  teachers'  salaries.  The  median  for  high  school  teachers  is 
21.2  %  of  the  total  amount  spent  for  salaries,  while  the  median 
for  the  enrolment  in  high  schools  is  9.9  %  of  the  total  enrolment 
in  day  schools.  In  seventeen  out  of  twenty-nine  cases,  the 
proportion  of  the  total  amount  spent  for  salaries  which  is  spent 
for  high  school  teachers'  salaries  is  two,  three,  or  even  four 
times  the  proportion  which  the  high  school  enrolment  is  of  the 
total  enrolment.  Of  the  remaining  twelve  cases,  seven  show  a 
proportionate  expenditure  for  high  school  teachers'  salaries 
almost  double  the  high  school's  proportion  of  the  total  number 
of  pupils. 

The  number  of  pupils  enrolled  per  teacher  in  the  elementary 
schools  varies  from  35  to  54,  while  in  the  high  schools  the  num- 
ber varies  from  17  to  43.  The  median  number  of  pupils  per 
teacher  is  44  for  the  elementary  schools,  and  27  for  the  high 
schools.  In  general,  the  enrolment  per  teacher  for  the  element- 
ary schools  is  about  one  and  one-half  times  the  enrolment  per 
teacher  in  the  high  schools. 

If  we  may  take  the  amount  spent  for  salaries  as  an  index 
of  the  relative  cost  of  high  and  elementary  school  education, 
we  must  conclude  from  the  data  given  above  that  secondary 
education  costs  two,  three,  or  even  four  times  as  much  per  pupil 
as  elementary  education.  What  we  would  like  to  have  is  the 
expenditures  for  high  schools  separate  from  those  for  elementary 
schools  in  order  to  be  entirely  certain  of  the  relative  cost  of 
elementary  and  secondary  education.     I  believe,  however,  that 


TABLE  XLV 


Ui  13 


"8  §2H  "85  •  S^g 

I  3i&  ffelj  ||| 

55  H  55  55 

5.  4,286  3,796  490 

6.  2,200  1,911  289 
8.  2,436  2,139  297 

13.  4,049  3,765  284 

14.  1,738  1,598  140 

15.  5,587  5,038  549 

16.  1,220  1,136  84 
20.  2,969  2,662  307 

27.  2,167  1,831  336 

28.  2,231  2,143  88 

30.  3,747  3,428  319 

31.  3,651  3,433  218 

32.  2,999  2,728  271 

34.  1,867  1,684  183 

35.  5,162  4,407  755 

36.  1,633  1,350  283 

37.  3,255  2,886  369 

39.  1,981  1,641  340 

40.  2,138  1,510  628 

41.  4,533  4,022  511 

42.  4,214  3,798  416 

43.  3,094  2,636  458 
45.  4,142  3,867  275 
48.  1,161  1,098  63 
52.  4,978  4,680  298 

54.  1,949  1,803  146 

55.  2,440  2,201  239 

56.  2,126  2,029  97 

57.  3,072  2,692  380 


Dtal    Amount    Spent 
for   Teachers'    Sala- 
ries;     Average     for 
Two  Years. 

mount  Spent  for  Ele- 
mentary          School 
Teachers'     Salaries; 
Average     for     Two 
Years. 

mount  Spent  for  High 
School         Teachers' 
Salaries ;        Average 
for  Two  Years. 

H 

< 

< 

86,850 

65,350 

21,500 

31,128 

22,396 

8,732 

39,570 

30,845 

8,725 

60,395 

51,545 

8,850 

25,932 

28,957 

4,975 

75,531 

62,137 

13,394 

17,285 

13,432 

3,853 

42,436 

33,184 

9,252 

22,595 

16,413 

6,182 

28,583 

23,927 

4,656 

76,185 

59,628 

16,557 

43,992 

36,193 

7,799 

41,268 

35,268 

6,000 

30,843 

24,285 

6,558 

82,351 

66,891 

15,460 

24,439 

18,102 

6,337 

30,491 

23,262 

7,229 

30,652 

22  362 

8,290 

30,963 

17,402 

13,561 

54,086 

42,803 

11,283 

48,937 

37,687 

11,250 

46,301 

36,244 

10,057 

60,237 

48,537 

11,700 

12,099 

10,424 

1,675 

58,192 

50,555 

7,637 

38,300 

31,650 

6,650 

21,762 

18,200 

3,562 

39,725 

36,175 

3,550 

74,495 

55,645 

18,850 

98 


TABLE  XLV  (Continued) 


CJ 

f  the  Total 

of     Pupils 

Enrolled  in 

try  Schools ; 

for     Two 

E  the  Total 
Spent    for 
that     is, 
r  Element- 
:hers'   Sala- 
verage     for 
rs. 

f  the  Total 
of     Pupils 
Enrolled  in 
:Ools;  Aver- 
wo  Years. 

f  the  Total 
Spent    for 
that     is, 
for       High 
Teachers' 
Average  for 
rs. 

ffe1 

8,1* 

s  0 

o 

0         "? 
<j  4)  C  C  tc 
c£  «J  3  fl  «o 

,-55  *««:>< 

O  .       *H 
**  v  0 

c-9  «  i  0 

O^  ..          ..  rt 

.  "£   </)               01   4) 

""Is 

51J 

S 
Jo 

i 

3 

fc<cflOTc8eoH 

ill 

55 

£ 

£ 

& 

£ 

55 

m 

5- 

88.5 

75.2 

11.5 

24.8 

43 

22 

6. 

86.9 

72.0 

13.1 

28.0 

50 

25 

8. 

87.7 

77.9 

12.3 

22.1 

47 

27 

13. 

93. 

85.3 

7. 

14.7 

38 

30 

14. 

91.8 

80.9 

8.2 

19.1 

35 

23 

15. 

90.1 

82.3 

9.9 

17.7 

48 

31 

16. 

93.1 

77.6 

6.9 

22.3 

35 

17 

20. 

89.6 

78.3 

10.4 

21.7 

49 

28 

27. 

84.4 

72.6 

15.6 

27.4 

47 

31 

28. 

96.1 

83.7 

3.9 

16.3 

44 

18 

30. 

91.4 

78.2 

8.6 

21.8 

38 

26 

3i. 

94.1 

82.2 

5.9 

17.8 

38 

24 

32. 

90.9 

85.4 

9.1 

14.6 

47 

36 

34- 

90.1 

78.8 

9.9 

21.2 

39 

23 

35- 

85.4 

81.2 

14.6 

18.8 

38 

34 

36. 

82.8 

74.2 

17.2 

25.8 

42 

27 

37- 

88.5 

76.3 

11.5 

23.7 

54 

34 

39- 

82.9 

72.8 

17.1 

27.2 

37 

30 

40. 

70.6 

56.2 

29.4 

43.8 

49 

34 

41. 

88.8 

79.1 

11.2 

20.9 

47 

30 

42. 

90.2 

77.0 

9.8 

23.0 

56 

29 

43. 

85.3 

78.3 

14.7 

21.7 

40 

36 

45- 

93.4 

80.6 

6.6 

19.4 

43 

19 

48. 

94.7 

86.1 

5.3 

13.9 

48 

21 

52. 

94.0 

86.9 

6. 

13.1 

50 

35 

54. 

92.5 

82.6 

7.5 

17.4 

35 

20 

55- 

90.2 

83.6 

9.8 

16.4 

54 

43 

56. 

95.4 

91.1 

4.6 

8.9 

46 

24 

57- 

87.7 

74.7 

12.3 

25.3 

38 

22 

99 


ioo  City  School  Expenditures 

the  item  of  salaries  is  a  good  index,  first,  because  the  item  of 
salaries  forms  from  60  %  to  80  %  of  the  entire  budget;  and, 
second,  because  other  expenditures  for  books,  supplies,  and  ap- 
paratus are  enough  larger,  in  proportion  to  the  number  of  pupils 
enrolled,  in  the  high  school  to  offset  an  expenditure  of  the  same 
amount  per  pupil  for  janitors'  salaries,  fuel,  repairs,  etc. 

CONCLUSION 

This  section  will  give  a  brief  general  summary  of  the  results 
which  have  already  been  obtained,  and  some  practical  sugges- 
tions which  grow  out  of  these  facts.  First,  with  regard  to  vari- 
ability, it  will  be  remembered  that  the  cost  per  pupil  for  the 
maintenance  and  operation  of  schools  in  the  cities  considered 
varies  from  $9  to  $55.  That  this  variation  in  the  total  cost  per 
pupil  is  not  due  entirely  to  the  relative  wealth  or  poverty  of 
the  different  communities  is  shown  conclusively  when  we  know 
that  the  cost  of  schools  in  cities  in  the  United  States  varies  from 
6  %  to  46  %  of  the  total  city  expenditure.1  An  equally  striking 
variability  is  found  in  the  cost  per  pupil  for  each  of  the  prin- 
cipal items  of  expense.  Even  when  cities  spending  about  the 
same  amount  per  pupil  are  considered,  it  is  found  that  the  dis- 
tribution of  the  money  among  the  several  items  seems  not  to 
show  anything  like  the  degree  of  uniformity  which  might  be 
expected  (see  page  44).  It  is  found  that  the  percentage  of  the 
total  cost  of  maintenance  and  operation  which  is  spent  for 
teaching  and  supervision  varies  from  44  %  to  82  %;  and  what 
possibly  seems  more  astonishing  is  the  fact  that  the  city  spend- 
ing the  smallest  proportion  for  teaching  and  supervision,  spends 
the  smallest  total  amount  per  pupil.  Janitors'  salaries  amount 
to  from  3  %  to  9  %  of  the  budget ;  one  city  spends  3  %  of  its 
money  for  fuel  and  another  spends  12%  for  the  same  purpose ; 
text-books  and  supplies  cost  from  1  %  to  13  %  of  the  total  cost 
of  maintenance  and  operation. 

Fuel  costs  three  times  as  much  per  pupil  in  one  city  as  in 
another.  The  expenditure  per  pupil  for  the  salaries  of  high 
school  teachers  varies  from  one  and  one  half  to  four  times  the 
cost  per  pupil  for  salaries  of  teachers  in  the  elementary  schools. 

1  These  results  are  from  an  unpublished  study  by  Mr.  E.  0.  Elliott, 
and  were  obtained  by  using  the  data  found  in  the  bulletins  of  the  Com- 
missioner of  Labor. 


City  School  Expenditures 

In  our  consideration  of  relationships  we  found  that  an  ex- 
pensive school  system  is  one  that  spends  more  than  the  usual 
amount  for  all  of  the  principal  items  of  expense.  A  large  posi- 
tive relationship  exists  between  the  proportion  spent  for  super- 
vision and  the  proportion  spent  for  text-books  and  supplies.  A 
lack  of  relationship  between  the  total  cost  per  pupil  and  the 
proportion  which  is  spent  for  teaching  and  supervision  seems 
to  indicate  that  additional  expenditures  may  not  mean,  as  they 
should,  a  greater  proportion  for  those  items  which  count  most 
for  the  efficiency  of  the  schools. 

These  and  the  many  other  facts  which  are  given  above  con- 
cerning the  variability  and  interrelation  of  the  principal  items 
of  expense  for  schools,  prove  conclusively  that  the  problem  of 
the  business  administration  of  city  school  systems  is  not  only 
a  real  and  vital  one,  but  also  that  we  may  expect  that  the 
schools  will  increase  in  efficiency  when  the  money  devoted  to 
public  education  is  distributed  among  the  various  items  in  the 
best  possible  way.  As  has  been  stated,  our  final  test  can  only 
be  found  by  testing  the  pupils  in  the  schools  in  order  to  rate 
different  systems  for  efficiency,  and  then  we  must  conclude  that 
those  cities  which  get  the  best  results  for  a  given  expenditure  per 
pupil  are  the  cities  which  properly  distribute  their  money.  How- 
ever, before  any  such  comparison  among  the  various  cities  can 
be  made,  we  must  have  more  detailed  information  with  regard 
to  the  way  in  which  the  money  is  used.  If  we  may  not  ask  city 
superintendents  or  boards  of  education  to  report  their  expendi- 
tures according  to  a  certain  fixed  form,  it  does  seem  that  we 
might  insist  that  their  reports  tell  us  for  just  what  purposes  the 
money  is  spent.  A  report  which  gave  the  various  items  of  ex- 
pense in  detail  would  enable  any  one  to  compare  cities  accord- 
ing to  whatever  classification  seemed  best.  Nor  would  such 
reports  be  without  their  value  to  the  persons  making  them. 
If  the  administrator  of  schools  is  to  secure  additional  money, 
either  for  purposes  for  which  money  is  already  used,  or  for  any 
new  field  of  activity,  he  can  have  no  better  argument  than  to 
be  able  to  show  just  what  results  are  obtained  in  his  own  and 
other  cities  from  a  given  expenditure.  Suppose,  for  example, 
that  a  superintendent  wishes  to  introduce  manual  training  or 
domestic  science ;  he  will  be  met  immediately  by  the  statement 
that  these  "fads"  are  expensive  and  not  at  all  necessary  as  a 


102  City  School  Expenditures 

part  of  public  education.  Now,  if  it  were  possible  for  him  to 
show  from  the  reports  of  other  cities  that  the  additional  ex- 
penditure was  comparatively  small,  and  that  results  obtained 
in  the  way  of  retaining  pupils  in  school  were  considerable,  he 
could  make  an  argument  which  would  have  some  weight. 

If  the  greatest  economy  is  to  be  had,  it  is  essential  that  the 
accounting  should  show  just  how  much  money  is  spent  for  each 
item,  and,  within  a  system  itself,  how  various  schools  compare. 
It  should  be  possible  for  the  administrative  officer  to  tell  just 
what  the  cost  per  pupil  is  for  each  school  within  the  system, 
and  to  compare  the  relative  cost  with  the  relative  efficiency  as 
found  by  testing  the  pupils  of  each  school.  No  great  corpora- 
tion would  to-day  continue  to  spend  money  for  purposes  for 
which  no  results  could  be  shown,  and  no  school  system  should 
so  report  its  expenditures  that  it  is  impossible  to  tell  how  much 
the  educational  policies  cost  which  it  advocates  and  carries  out. 

It  seems  hardly  right  to  expect  that  a  superintendent  whose 
time  is  already  overcrowded,  and  who  has  as  his  assistant  a 
clerk  worth  $500  a  year,  should  be  asked  or  expected  to  origi- 
nate or  carry  out  any  such  policy  of  accounting  as  has  been 
suggested  above.  But  when  we  recall  again  the  great  variability 
which  is  found  for  those  items  of  expense  which  might  be  ex- 
pected to  be  fairly  constant,  we  feel  that  it  is  not  out  of  place 
to  suggest  that  the  salary  of  a  competent  business  agent  or 
director  might  be  paid  out  of  the  savings  which  would  be  made 
by  the  proper  administration  of  the  business  affairs  of  the 
schools,  and  that  the  efficiency  of  the  schools  might  be  increased 
as  the  result  of  the  proper  distribution  of  the  money  spent. 
When  the  best  judgment  is  used  in  the  purchase  and  use  of 
supplies  and  equipment  as  well  as  in  the  selection  of  teachers 
and?  supervisiors  of  instruction,  when  the  money  which  is  spent 
for  schools  is  properly  distributed  among  the  various  items  of 
the  budget,  when  expenditures  are  shown  in  reports  in  connec- 
tion with  the  results  obtained,  then  our  schools  will  be  found  to 
have  improved  in  efficiency,  and  then  they  will  be  able  to  com- 
mand the  respect  and  increased  support  of  the  community. 


City  School  Expenditures  103 


ACKNOWLEDGMENT 

The  author  wishes  to  acknowledge  his  indebtedness  to  those 
whose  aid  has  made  this  study  possible.  It  is  only  through  the 
efficient  cooperation  of  very  many  friends  that  such  a  study  as 
this  can  be  undertaken.  It  is,  therefore,  with  a  sense  of  pe- 
culiar obligation  that  I  express  my  thanks  to  all  those  who 
helped  in  the  collection  of   data.     Among  them  are:    Messrs. 

F.  W.  Atkinson,  Emmet  Belknap,  N.  L.  Bishop,  D.  C.  Bliss, 

G.  N.  Bliss,  Eugene  Bouton,  H.  O.  Bowers,  C.  B.  Boyer,  F.  D. 
Boynton,  A.  D.  Call,  J.  H.  Carfrey,  W.  E.  Chancellor,  J.  H. 
Christie,  R.  J.  Condon,  F.  E.  Corbin,  J.  M.  Crane,  A.  D.  Dunbar, 
J.  G.  Edgerly,  Thomas  Emerson,  J.  A.  Estes,  W.  B.  Ferguson, 

E.  H.  Forbes,  J.  B.  Gifford,  J.  C.  Gray,  I.  F.  Hall,  E.  S.  Harris, 

F.  J.  Heavens,  E.  J.  Hitchner,  C.  L.  Hunt,  L.  R.  Hunt,  T.  R. 
Kneil,  H.  W.  Lull,  A.  B.  Mather,  F.  E.  McFee,  John  Millar,  H. 
T.  Morrow,  C.  H.  Morss,  W.  A.  Mowry,  F.  R.  Page,  W.  D.  Par- 
kinson, F.  E.  Parian,  Freeman  Putney,  E.  S.  Redman,  R.  R. 
Rogers,  A.  L.  Safford,  F.  J.  Sagendorph,  S.  R.  Shear,  E.  E.  Sher- 
man, Randall  Spaulding,  R.  A.  Taylor,  W.  H.  Truesdale,  J.  F. 
Tuthill,  J.  C.  Van  Etten,  C.  F.  Walker,  Robt.  Waters,  E.  C. 
Willard,  J.  I.  Wood,  and  I.  E.  Young.  To  these  and  the  many 
others  who  rendered  valuable  assistance  in  the  collection  of 
material,  the  author  acknowledges  his  indebtedness. 

Whatever  merit  the  treatment  of  the  data  which  were  col- 
lected has,  is  due  to  the  teaching  of  Professor  Edward  Lee 
Thorndike,  to  whom  the  author  is  also  indebted  for  very  many 
most  helpful  suggestions  and  for  constant  criticism. 

For  assistance  in  the  numerical  work,  without  which  this 
study  could  not  have  been  completed  for  some  months  to  come, 
the  author  is  indebted  to  Miss  Jeanette  F.  Seibert,  Assistant  in 
Psychology  in  Teachers  College. 


104  City  School  Expenditures 


VITA 

The  author  of  this  dissertation,  George  Drayton  Strayer, 
was  born  at  Wayne,  Delaware  County,  Pennsylvania,  on  No- 
vember 29,  1876.  He  received  his  early  education  in  the  public 
schools  of  Pennsylvania,  graduating  from  the  Lewistown  High 
School  in  1893.  He  was  a  student  at  Bucknell  University 
during  the  year  1896-1897,  and  at  the  Johns  Hopkins  Univer- 
sity from  1900  to  1903,  from  which  last-named  University  he 
received  the  degree  of  Bachelor  of  Arts  in  1903.  He  was  a 
student  at  the  Columbia  University  Summer  School  in  1 903 ; 
student  at  Columbia  University  and  Earl  Scholar  in  Teachers 
College  during  the  year  1 903-1 904;  and  Fellow  in  Education  in 
Teachers  College,  Columbia  University,  during  the  year  1904- 
1905- 


<?  9 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW 

AN     INITIAL    FINE    OF    25     CENTS 

WILL  BE  ASSESSED  FOR  FAILURE  TO  RETURN 
THIS  BOOK  ON  THE  DATE  DUE.  THE  PENALTY 
WILL  INCREASE  TO  SO  CENTS  ON  THE  FOURTH 
DAY  AND  TO  $1.00  ON  THE  SEVENTH  DAY 
OVERDUE. 


MAR  5   IF  5 


LD  21-50m-l,'3 


YC  04218 


n  t\  n 


